( 2025:HHC:28233 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No. 13134 of 2025 Decided on: August 20 , 2025 Vijay Kumar ...Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh & Ors. ...Respondents Coram: Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge 1Whether approved for reporting? For the petitioner : Ms. Kiran Dhiman, Advocate. For the respondents : Mr. Vishwajeet Sharma, Additional Advocate General for respondents-State. Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge Heard. 2. Petitioner is serving as Lecturer (Physics) at GSSS Biar (Hamirpur). He has taken exception to office order dated 23.07.2025 (Annexure P-1) whereby he has been transferred to GSSS Gangath (Kangra) vice respondent No. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner urged that petitioner has not completed his normal tenure at present place of posting; That petitioner was transferred to 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes. ( 2025:HHC:28233) 2 GSSS Biar (Hamirpur) on 01.11.2023; That he had completed less than two years at present place of posting at the time of issuance of the impugned transfer order. Learned counsel for the petitioner was directed to place on record the incumbency position of the petitioner. The same now stands placed on record. Detail of petitioner’s last four postings, as supplied by the learned counsel for the petitioner, is as under:- “Joined at GSSS Gaarli Hamirpur on 02.08.2018 Joined at GSSS Bani Hamirpur on 23.07.2020 Joined at GSSS Gaarliu Hamirpur on 26.04.2022 Joined at GSSS Biar Hamirpur on 01.11.2023.” 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner fairly submitted that distance between Gaarli & Bani, both in District Hamirpur, is not more than 20 kilometer; Similarly, distance between Bani & Gaarliu and between Gaarliu & Biar is less than 20 kilometers. It being admitted position that petitioner had been serving within short distance in District Hamirpur since 2018 i.e. for the last seven years, petitioner’s grievance of having short tenure at the present place of posting is not tenable. 4. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that petitioner is facing adverse family circumstances inasmuch as his brother who is 56 years old is mentally disabled and petitioner is ( 2025:HHC:28233) 3 responsible for looking after him as also his aged parents. Learned counsel further submitted that petitioner be permitted to prefer a representation to the respondents citing his adverse family circumstances whereafter the respondents/competent authority be directed to decide the same in accordance with law within a fixed time schedule. Learned Additional Advocate General is not averse to this prayer. 5. In view of the above submissions, this writ petition is disposed of by permitting the petitioner to file a representation to respondent No. 2/competent authority for his suitable adjustment within one week from today, whereafter the same shall be considered and decided by the said authority in accordance with law within a period of two weeks thereafter. The decision so arrived at shall also be communicated to the petitioner. It is clarified that this order shall not come in the way of joining of respondent No. 3 in terms of office order dated 23.07.2025 (Annexure P-1). Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge August 20 , 2025 (PK)