IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.13621 of 2025 Date of Decision: 25.08.2025 _______________________________________________________ Jai Krishan …….Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and others … Respondents _______________________________________________________ Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? 1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Vishal Verma, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Rajan Kahol and Mr. Vishal, Additional Advocate Generals and Mr. Ravi Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General, for the respondents-State. ____________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, Judge(oral): Petitioner herein, who at present is working as Animal Husbandry Assistant, Banikhet, District Chamba, District Chamba, Himachal Pradesh, has approached this Court in the instant proceedings seeking direction to the respondents to consider and decide representation dated 01.07.2025 (Annexure P-2), whereby prayer has been made on behalf of the petitioner for his transfer from afore station to one of the stations of her choice, as detailed in the representation, on the ground that petitioner has left with less than two years to retire from service. 1Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 2. Having regard to the nature of prayer and order proposed to be passed, this Court sees no necessity to call for reply on behalf of the respondents, who are otherwise represented by Mr. Vishal Panwar, learned Additional Advocate General. Learned Additional Advocate General fairly states that representation, if not already decided, shall be decided expeditiously. 3. Having carefully perused the averments contained in the petition, which are duly supported by the affidavit , this Court finds that petitioner has left with less than two years service, coupled with the fact that transfer policy formulated by the Government of Himachal Pradesh enables an employee nearing retirement to seek transfer to one of the stations of his choice, this Court sees no impediment in issuing direction to the respondents to consider and decide the pending representation dated 01.07.2025 (Annexure P-2) of the petitioner expeditiously, preferably within a period of three 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 appropriate order, taking note transfer policy. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. 1. p (Sandeep Sharma), Judge August 25,2025 (shankar)