IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.13753 of 2025 Date of Decision: 27.8.2025 _____________________________________________________________________ Babita 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. Sat Prakash, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General with Mr. Rajan Kahol, Mr. Vishal Panwar and Mr. B.C. Verma, Additional Advocates General and Mr. Ravi Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General. ___________________________________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, J. (Oral) Petitioner herein, who at present is working as Language Teacher at Government High School Bhaled u/c GSSS Darini, Education Block Rait, District Kangra, Himachal Pradesh, has approached this Court in the instant proceedings, seeking therein direction to the respondents to consider and decide her pending representation (Annexure P-2), whereby she has prayed for her transfer from District Kangra to District Chamba under 5% inter- District quota on account of the fact that she has already completed five years in District Kangra, Himachal Pradesh. 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.Vishal Panwar, learned Additional Advocate General. Mr. Panwar, - 2 - fairly states that representation, if not already decided, shall be decided expeditiously. 3. It is quite apparent from the pleadings adduced on record that petitioner has already completed five years service in District Kangra, Himachal Pradesh and as such, she is entitled to make representation in terms of notification dated 20.11.2021, issued by the Government of Himachal Pradesh, wherein a provision for inter- district Transfer under 5% quota has been provided and as such, her prayer for transfer to District Chamba, deserves to be considered in light of afore transfer policy. 2. Consequently, in view of the above, this Court, without going into the merits of the case, deems it fit to dispose of the present petition with direction to the respondents/competent authority to decide the pending representation having been filed by the petitioner (Annexure P-2), expeditiously, preferably, within 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 a speaking order thereupon taking note of transfer policy as detailed herein above. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. August 27, 2025 (Sandeep Sharma), (manjit) Judge