IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.3263 of 2025 Date of Decision: 8.4.2025 _____________________________________________________________________ Parveen ……...Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and Ors. …....Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? For the Petitioner: Mr. Manohar Lal Sharma, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General with Mr. Rajan Kahol, Mr. Vishal Panwar and Mr. B.C. Verma, Additional Advocates General and Mr. Ravi Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General. ___________________________________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, J. (Oral) Petitioner herein, who at present is working as JBT at Government Primary School Nalwagi, Post Office Kholanal, Education Block Seraj-II, Tehsil Balichwoki, District Mandi, Himachal Pradesh, which is a hard area, has approached this Court in the instant proceedings, seeking therein direction to the respondents to consider his prayer to transfer him from aforesaid station to one of the stations of his choice in terms of transfer policy on account of his having completed normal tenure in hard area i.e. two winters and three summers. - 2 - 2. From the careful perusal of averments contained in the petition, which is duly supported by an affidavit, this Court finds that petitioner herein was initially appointed as JBT on contract basis on 28.2.2017. Though his services were regularized on 8.5.2020, but yet he has been serving at the aforesaid station. Since petitioner has already served for more than eight years at present place of posting, he has filed representation to the competent authority seeking therein transfer from aforesaid station to one of the stations of his choice in terms of transfer policy formulated by the Government of Himachal Pradesh. 3. Having regard to the nature of prayer and order proposed to be passed, this court sees no necessity to call for reply from the respondents, who are otherwise represented by Mr. Ravi Chauhan learned Deputy Advocate General. Mr. Chauhan, states that representation, if not already decided, shall be decided expeditiously. 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 a direction to the respondents to consider and decide the pending representation of the petitioner expeditiously, preferably within a period of four weeks. Ordered accordingly. Needless to say, authority concerned, while affording opportunity of hearing to the petitioner shall also take note of the transfer policy formulated by the Government of Himachal Pradesh, which provides for transfer of an - 3 - employee from hard area to soft area, after his/her having completed normal tenure at the present place of posting i.e. two winters and three summers and pass appropriate orders. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. April 8, 2025 (Sandeep Sharma), (manjit) Judge