IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.20915 of 2025 Date of Decision: 30.12.2025 _____________________________________________________________________ Bikram Singh ……...Petitioner Versus HPSEBL & Ors. …....Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? For the Petitioner: Mr. Surender Sharma, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. Anil Kumar, Advocate. ___________________________________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, J. (Oral) Petitioner herein, who at present is working as JOA (Accounts) is aggrieved by order dated 29.10.2025 (Annexure P-2), whereby he has been transferred from Elect. Division HPSEBL, Shahpur to Chief Accounts Officer (F&A) Wing, HPSEBL, Shimla, vice Mr. Vishal Kumar, respondent No.3. 2. Precisely, the grouse of the petitioner, as has been highlighted in the petition and further canvassed by Mr. Surender Sharma, learned counsel representing the petitioner, is that impugned transfer order is in violation of Transfer Policy because same has been issued with a view to accommodate respondent No.3, who was actually transferred from ESD Lapiana to Elect. Division, HPSEBL, Shahpur. However, subsequently afore official succeeded in dislodging the petitioner from Shahpur on the basis of DO Note issued by some extra constitutional authority. 3. Having regard to the nature of prayer and order proposed to be passed in the instant petition, this Court sees no necessity to call for the reply from the respondents, who are otherwise represented by Mr. Anil Kumar, Advocate. Mr. Anil Kumar, states that since petitioner has already completed normal tenure at present place of posting, coupled with the fact that he has already joined at transferred station, present petition is not maintainable, as such, the same deserves to be dismissed. 4. Once it is not in dispute that petitioner has completed normal tenure at Shahpur, factum, if any, with regard to issuance of DO Note by some extra constitutional authority, thereby recommending the transfer of the petitioner from Shahpur to Shimla, may not be of much relevance. 5. Though for the reasons stated hereinabove, this Court sees no reason to interfere with the impugned transfer order, however, having taken note of the fact that daughter of the petitioner is 100% disabled, coupled with the fact that Transfer Policy formulated by the Government of Himachal Pradesh, enables an employee to seek transfer/adjustment on the ground of disability of his/her wards, this 2 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 (Annexure P-3) of the petitioner expeditiously, preferably within ten days from today. 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 taking note of observations made hereinabove as well as illness/disability of the daughter of the petitioner. Pending applications, if any, stand disposed of. December 30, 2025 (Sandeep Sharma), (sunil) Judge 3