IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.14717 of 2025 Date of Decision: 11.09.2025 ____________________________________________________________ Kriti Pathania …….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. Tek Chand Sharma, Advocate. For the Respondents: 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 TGT (Arts) at GSSS Sarounjh, Tehsil Padhar, District Mandi, H.P., has approached this Court in the instant proceedings, seeking directions to respondents to consider and decide her pending representation (Annexure P-1), whereby she has prayed for her transfer from afore station i.e. Chuhar Valley, which is claimed to be most difficult area, to one of the station of her choice, as detailed in the representation, on account of her having completed normal tenure of posting in hard/difficult area coupled with the fact that she has been recently blessed with twins and there are no adequate medical facilities at the present place of posting, in time bound manner. 2. 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 1Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 represented by Mr. Vishal Panwar, learned Additional Advocate General. Mr. Panwar fairly states that pending representation, if not already decided, shall be decided expeditiously, in accordance with law. 3. 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 in hard/difficult area i.e. two winters and three summers, coupled with the fact that Transfer Policy, formulated by the Government of Himachal Pradesh, enables an employee serving in hard/difficult area, to seek transfer to soft area, after his/her having completed normal tenure of posting, this Court sees no impediment in issuing directions to respondents to consider and decide the pending representation of the petitioner, expeditiously. 4. 4. 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 the direction to respondents to consider and decide the pending representation (Annexure P-1) 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 being heard to the petitioner and pass appropriate orders. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. (Sandeep Sharma), Judge September 11, 2025 (Rajeev Raturi)