IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.16273 of 2025 Date of Decision: 15.10.2025 _______________________________________________________ Princi Sharma …….Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and others … Respondents _______________________________________________________ Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? 1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Nimish Gupta, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General with Mr. Rajan Kahol and Mr. Vishal Panwar, Additional Advocate Generals and Mr. Ravi Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General . ____________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, Judge(oral): Petitioner herein seeking direction to the respondents to consider and decide her pending representation dated 28.08.2025 (Annexure P-4), whereby she has prayed to post her in one of the stations, as detailed in the representation. It emerges from the pleadings adduced on record, which are duly supported by an affidavit that petitioner herein, who was working as TGT came to be promoted o the post of Lecturer(School) vide order dated 21.08.2025 (Annexure P-1) and she was given posting at Government Senior Secondary School, Bahadpur, Kangra. However, subsequently, vide order dated 27.08.2025, she was again transferred from Government Senior Secondary School, Bahadpur, Kangra to Government Senior 1Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 Secondary School Charri, District Kangra, Himachal Pradesh. Though, in terms of aforesaid order, petitioner went to Charri for giving her joining, but since some other person had joined at Charri by that time, petitioner was not permitted to join by the Principal of the school concerned. In view of aforesaid development, petitioner is without any station. 2. Though, prior to filing the petition at hand, petitioner approached competent authority by way of representation dated 28.08.2025 (Annexure P-4) for her posting at one of the stations as detailed in the representation, but since needful has been not done till date, she is compelled to approach this Court in the instant proceedings seeking direction to the respondents to give her posting at one of the stations, as detailed in the representation. 3. While putting appearance on behalf of the respondents, Mr. Vishal Panwar, learned Additional Advocate General, states that though in terms of promotion of the petitioner from TGT to Lecturer, she has required to be given posting at some school, but she cannot claim transfer at one particular station, rather posting order shall be issued by the competent authority on the basis of requirement. 4. True it is that petitioner after her promotion cannot seek posting at one particular school, but once it is not in dispute that after her having been promoted, she pursuant to order passed by the 3 competent authority had gone to Charri for joining, but on account of transfer of some other person, she was unable to join, coupled with the fact that posts are lying vacant at the stations indicated by the petitioner in the representation, this Court sees no impediment in issuing direction to the respondents to consider and decide the representation dated 28.08.2025 (Annexure P-4) of the petitioner expeditiously, preferably within a period of two 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 order, taking note of the fact that despite there being promotion order issued by the respondents, petitioner herein has not been able to get posting order till date and at present posts are lying vacant in the schools indicated by the petitioner in her representation. Needless to say, petitioner herein shall be entitled to seniority qua the post of Lecturer from the date she was promoted against the post in question. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. 1. p (Sandeep Sharma), Judge October 15,2025 (shankar)