IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.13459 of 2025 Date of Decision: 22.8.2025 _____________________________________________________________________ Leela Devi ……...Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and Ors. …....Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? For the Petitioner: Mr. Rajesh Verma, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr.Anup Rattan, Advocate General with Mr. Rajan Kahol, Mr. Vishal Panwar and Mr. B.C. Verma, Additional Advocates General with Mr. Ravi Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General. ___________________________________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, J. (Oral) Petitioner herein, who, at present, is working as Computer Operator in the office of Sub Treasury Rampur, Tehsil Rampur, District Shimla, Himachal Pradesh, has approached this Court in the instant proceedings, seeking therein direction to the respondents to consider and decide her representations (Annexure P-5 & P-6), whereby she has prayed for her transfer to one of the stations as detailed in the representations on the ground that she is 60% disabled. 2. Having regard to the nature of order proposed to be passed in the instant proceedings, this Court sees no necessity to call for reply from the respondents, who are otherwise represented by Mr. Ravi Chauhan, learned Deputy Advocate General, who fairly states that though in terms of transfer policy, request for transfer shall be - 2 - considered on the ground that she is 60% disabled, but subject to availability of vacancy. 3. Since it is quite apparent from the pleading adduced on record in the petition, which is duly supported by an affidavit, that petitioner is 60% disabled coupled with the fact that transfer policy formulated by the Government of Himachal Pradesh provides for certain concession to a person having disability of more than 60%, this Court without going into the merits of the case, deems it fit to dispose of the present petition with direction to the respondents to consider and decide pending representations of the petitioner, expeditiously, preferably, within two weeks. Ordered accordingly. Needless to say, authority concerned, while doing the needful in terms of instant order, shall afford an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and pass a speaking order taking note of transfer policy as detailed herein above as well as extent of disability of the petitioner. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. August 22, 2025 (Sandeep Sharma), (manjit) Judge