IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.15111 of 2025 Date of Decision:18.09.2025 _______________________________________________________ Ashish Kumar …….Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh & another … Respondents _______________________________________________________ Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? 1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Rupesh Kumar, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Rajan Kahol, Mr. Vishal Panwar and Mr. B.C.Verma, Additional Advocate Generals, with Mr. Ravi Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General. Mr ___________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, Judge(oral): Petitioner herein, who at present is working as TGT (NM) at Government High School, Dhalli u/c Government Senior Secondary School Piran, District Shimla, Himachal Pradesh, has approached this Court in the instant proceedings, seeking direction to the respondents to consider and decide his representation (Annexure P-4), whereby he has prayed for his transfer from afore station to one of the stations of his choice, as detailed in the representation, on the ground of disability. 2. It is averred at the behest of the petitioner that he is disabled to the extent of 45% and as such, is entitled to be posted at a station of his choice/ convenience in terms of transfer policy, which certainly enables an employee having disability to seek transfer to a station of his choice or convenience. 1Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 3. 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. Ravi Chauhan, learned Deputy Advocate General. Learned Deputy Advocate General fairly states that representation, if not already decided, shall be decided expeditiously. 4. Since it is apparent from the pleadings as well as documents adduced on record at the behest of the petitioner that petitioner is disabled to the extent of 45% and transfer policy formulated by the Government of Himachal Pradesh, provides certain concessions to an employee having disabled, this Court without going into the merits of the case, deems it fit to dispose of the present petition, with a direction to the respondents to consider and decide the pending representation (Annexure P-4) of the petitioner expeditiously, preferably within a period of four weeks. Ordered accordingly. 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 of observations made hereinabove. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. 2. p (Sandeep Sharma), Judge September 18,2025 (shankar)