: IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No. 15472 of 2025 Date of decision: 24.09.2025 Rajeev Kumar ...Petitioner. Versus State of H.P. & Ors. ...Respondents. Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Satyen Vaidya, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the petitioner : Mr. Neeraj Kumar Shashwat, Advocate. For respondents : Mr. Rajat Chaudhary, Assistant Advocate General. Satyen Vaidya, Judge (Oral): Notice. Mr. Rajat Chaudhary, learned Assistant Advocate General, appears and waives service of notice on behalf of the respondents/State. 2. The instant petition has been filed with limited prayer to direct the second respondent to consider and decide the representation of the petitioner (Annexure P-3), in a time bound manner. 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? -2- 3. The grievance raised by the petitioner is that he has already completed normal tenure in the hard area and has thus, in terms of transfer policy adopted by the State Government, become entitled to be posted at a station of his choice. In this context, the representation, as noticed above, has been submitted by him but till date no decision has been taken. 4. Keeping in view, the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, respondent No.2 is directed to consider and decide the representation of the petitioner, Annexure P3, within three weeks from today strictly in terms of the transfer policy adopted by the State Government and the petitioner shall be intimated with the decision so taken. 5. The petition is accordingly disposed of. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. (Satyen Vaidya) 24th September, 2025 Judge (Shamsh Tabrez)