1Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.14394 of 2025 Date of decision: 05.09.2025 Meena Ram. ...Petitioner. Versus State of H.P. & Ors. ...Respondents. Coram: Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? For the petitioner : Mr. Mohan Sharma, Advocate. For the respondents : Mr. L.N. Sharma, Additional Advocate General. Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge Notice. Mr. L.N. Sharma, Additional Advocate General, appears and waives service of notice on behalf of the respondents. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, matter is heard at this stage. 2. The petitioner was serving as a Driver in the office of the Child Development Program Officer, Karsog, District Mandi. His grievance pertains to office order dated 29.08.2025 (Annexure P-1), whereby he was sent on secondment basis to the office of the Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Himachal Pradesh, Shimla. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner had joined his present posting on 25.05.2025 and is due to superannuate -2- on 31.12.2025. As he has not completed his normal tenure at present place and in view of his impending superannuation, the office order dated 29.08.2025 transferring him from Karsog to Shimla is bad in the eyes of law, being inconsistent with the applicable transfer policy. 3. A perusal of the impugned order reveals that the petitioner was actually in the surplus pool and, as such, was serving in the office of the respondent-Child Development Program Officer, Karsog. Under the impugned order, he was not transferred but deployed on secondment basis in the office of Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Himachal Pradesh, Shimla. Being in the surplus pool, the petitioner is, therefore, liable to be deployed elsewhere so that his services may be effectively utilized. Nevertheless, it cannot be overlooked that the petitioner is due to superannuate within the next four months and therefore, is entitled to seek posting at convenient stations subject to feasibility. 4. Taking into consideration the submissions made for the petitioner, it will be expedient to dispose of this petition with the following directions:- -3- 4(i). Petitioner is permitted to prefer a representation to the respondent No.3/competent authority against the impugned office order seeking his suitable adjustment/deployment on secondment basis at some other place within a period of one week from today. In case, such representation is so preferred, the Competent Authority shall consider and decide the same in accordance with law and applicable transfer policy within a further period of one week. The order so passed shall also be communicated to the petitioner. 4(ii). Till such time, the operation of office order dated 29.08.2025 (Annexure P-1) shall remain stayed qua the petitioner. 4(iii). It is further clarified that in case the petitioner fails to prefer the aforesaid representation within the stipulated period, the interim protection granted under this order shall be deemed to have been automatically vacated. This writ petition is disposed of in above terms so also the pending miscellaneous application(s), if any. Jyotsna Rewal Dua 5th September, 2025 Judge (Pardeep)