IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.16187 of 2025 Date of Decision: 15.10.2025 _______________________________________________________ Ms. Prem Lata …….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: Ms. Anchal Sharma, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Rajan Kahol and Mr. Vishal Panwar, Additional Advocate Generals and Mr. Ravi Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General. ____________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, Judge (oral): Petitioner herein, who at present is working as Oriental Teacher, at GHS Kahari, District Chamba, has approached this Court in the instant proceedings seeking directions to respondents to consider and decide her pending representation (Annexure P-2), whereby prayer has been made to transfer her from District Chamba to District Kangra under 5% inter-district quota on account of adverse family circumstances. 2. 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 respondents, who are otherwise represented by Mr. Vishal Panwar, learned Additional Advocate General. Mr. Panwar fairly states that 1Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 pending representation, if not already decided, shall be decided expeditiously, in accordance with law. 3. It is not in dispute, rather quite evident from the notification dated 20.11.2021 that C&V Teachers can seek transfer from one district to another under 5% inter-district quota. Since petitioner, being married women teacher, is exempted from the condition of five years of service in the present district and as such, she is well within her rights to represent to Government in terms of afore notification for transfer to other district, but since such prayer has not been accepted by the respondents, she is compelled to approach this Court in the instant proceedings. 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 of the petitioner, expeditiously, preferably, within a period of four weeks. 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 thereupon taking note of notification dated 20.11.2021, which certainly enables an employee to seek transfer from one district to another district under 5% inter-district quota. 3 In the aforesaid terms, present petition is disposed of along with pending application(s), if any. p` (Sandeep Sharma), Judge October 15, 2025 (Rajeev Raturi)