IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.20243 of 2025 Date of Decision: 22.12.2025 ____________________________________________________________ Jai Pal …….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: Mr. Ajay Kumar Dhiman, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Rajan Kahol & Mr. Vishal Panwar, Additional Advocates General, with Mr. Ravi Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General, for State. ____________________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, Judge (oral): Petitioner herein, who at present is working as Junior Basic Teacher at GPS Neri Kalan, Centre Gatogra, Education Block Dharampur, H.P., has approached this Court in the instant proceedings, seeking directions to respondents to consider and decide his pending representation (Annexure P-2), whereby he has prayed for his transfer from afore station, which is notified as hard area by the State of Himachal Pradesh, to one of the station of his choice, as detailed in the representation, on account of his having completed normal tenure of posting in hard/difficult area, in time bound manner. 2. Having regard to the nature of prayer made in the instant petition and order proposed to be passed, this Court sees no necessity to call for the reply on behalf of the respondents, who are otherwise represented by Mr. Ravi Chauhan, learned Deputy Advocate General. Mr. Chauhan though states that Neri Kalan is not a hard area, but yet 1Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 representation, if any, filed by the petitioner shall be decided expeditiously, in accordance with law. 3. Since careful perusal of pleadings adduced on record by the petitioner, which is duly supported by affidavit, suggests that Neri Kalan, where petitioner is posted at present, is notified as hard area, coupled with the fact that Transfer Policy, formulated by the Government of Himachal Pradesh, enables an employee serving in hard/difficult area, to seek transfer to soft area, after his/her having completed normal tenure of posting, this Court sees no impediment inasmuch as issuing directions to respondents to consider and decide the pending representation of the petitioner, 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 the direction to respondents to consider and decide the pending representation (Annexure P-2) 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 being heard to the petitioner and pass appropriate orders thereupon. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. (Sandeep Sharma), Judge December 22, 2025 (Rajeev Raturi)