IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.12629 of 2025 Date of Decision: 04.08.2025 _____________________________________________________________________ Pramod Singh Guleria ……...Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh & Ors. …....Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? For the Petitioner: Mr. Bhishm Sharma, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General, Mr. Rajan Kahol, Mr. Vishal Panwar & Mr. B.C. Verma, Additional Advocate Generals with Mr. Ravi Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General. ___________________________________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, J. (Oral) Petitioner herein, who at present is working as Clerk at Tehsildar office Pangi at Killar, Tehsil & District Chamba, Himachal Pradesh, has approached this Court in the instant proceedings, seeking therein direction to the respondents to consider and decide his pending representation (Annexure P-3), whereby he has prayed for his transfer from present place of posting to one of the stations, as detailed in the representation, on account of his having completed normal tenure of posting in hard/tribal area. 2. Having regard to the nature of prayer and order proposed to be passed in the instant petition, this Court sees no necessity to call for the reply from the respondents, who are otherwise represented by Mr. Rajan Kahol, learned Additional Advocate General. Mr. Kahol, fairly states that petitioner cannot be said to have completed normal tenure at present place of posting because he was appointed as Clerk on contract basis in the respondents-department in September, 2022 and his services were regularized in April, 2025. He states that services for the purpose of completion of tenure as per Transfer Policy would commence in the case of petitioner from the date of his regularization. 3. Having carefully perused averments contained in the petition, this Court finds that petitioner was initially appointed on contract basis in the month of September, 2022 and thereafter after completion of three years, his services were regularized. Since petitioner has already completed more than three years in tribal area, prayer made on behalf of the petitioner to issue direction to the respondents to consider and decide his representation deserves to be allowed. If Transfer Policy perused in its entirety, it nowhere makes any distinction between the employees working on contract basis and regular basis, rather both are covered under the ambit of the Transfer Policy. 4. Leaving everything aside, petitioner, while serving the department, has already completed normal tenure in hard/tribal area i.e. two winters and three summers, coupled with the fact that 2 Transfer Policy enables an employee to seek transfer from hard area to soft area on his/her having completed normal tenure, this Court sees no impediment in issuing direction to the respondents to consider and decide the representation of the petitioner. 4. Consequently, in view of above, this Court, without going into the merits of the case, deems it fit to dispose of the present petition, with a direction to the respondents to consider and decide the pending representation (Annexure P-3) filed by the petitioner expeditiously, preferably within a period of three weeks from today. Ordered accordingly. Needless to say, authority concerned, while doing the needful in terms of instant order, shall afford an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner and pass appropriate orders taking note of observations made hereinabove as well as Transfer Policy formulated by the Government of Himachal Pradesh. Pending applications, if any, stand disposed of. August 04, 2025 (Sandeep Sharma), (sunil) Judge 3