IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.14541 of 2025 Date of Decision: 08.09.2025 ____________________________________________________________ Sh. Jagdish Chand …….Petitioner Versus State of H.P. and Others ….Respondents ____________________________________________________________ Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? 1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Naresh Kaul, 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, for State. ____________________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, Judge (oral): Petitioner herein, who at present is working as Head Teacher at GPS Sheetalpur, Education Block Ramshehar, District Solan, H.P., is aggrieved of order dated 04.09.2025 (Annexure P-8), passed by Deputy Director School Education (Elem.), Solan, District Solan, H.P., whereby petitioner has been transferred from afore station to GPS Binno, Education Block Kandaghat. 2. Precisely, the grouse of the petitioner, as has been highlighted in the petition and further canvassed by Mr. Naresh Kaul, learned counsel representing the petitioner is that impugned transfer order has been passed in violation of Transfer Policy, formulated by the Government of Himachal Pradesh, because he has not completed normal tenure of posting at present place of posting. He states that petitioner never applied for transfer and as such, could not have been denied the TTA etc. 1Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 3. Having regard to the nature of prayer made in the instant petition and order proposed to be passed, this Court sees no necessity to call for the reply on behalf of the respondents, who are otherwise represented by Mr. Ravi Chauhan, learned Additional Advocate General. Mr. Chauhan states that petitioner has already completed normal tenure of posting at present place of posting and as such, no illegality can be said to have been committed by the respondents while passing impugned transfer order, whereby he has been transferred from the present place of posting to GPS Binno, Education Block Kandaghat. 4. Since it is quite apparent from the averments contained in the petition, which is duly supported by way of affidavit, that petitioner has already completed normal tenure of posting at present place of posting, there appears to be no justification for this Court to interfere with the impugned transfer order and as such, same is upheld, however, this Court, having taken note of adverse family circumstances, as came to be apprised to this Court during proceedings of the case, deems it fit to dispose of the present petition, reserving liberty to the petitioner to file representation to the competent authority within a period of two days, for his transfer/adjustment at convenient station on account of adverse family circumstance, which in-turn shall be decided by the afore authority expeditiously, preferably, within a period of two weeks. Ordered accordingly. Needless to say, authority concerned while doing the needful in terms of instant order, shall afford an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner and pass appropriate orders thereupon. Till the time, 3 representation, if filed within a period of two days, is decided by the competent authority, petitioner shall not be relieved, if not already relieved. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. (Sandeep Sharma), Judge September 08, 2025 (Rajeev Raturi)