IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.17711 of 2025 Date of Decision: 14.11.2025 ____________________________________________________________ Roop Lal Sharma …….Petitioner Versus State of H.P. and Another ….Respondents ____________________________________________________________ Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? 1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Mohan Sharma, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Rajan Kahol & Mr. Vishal Panwar, Additional Advocates General, with Mr. Anish Banshtu, Deputy Advocate General, for State. ____________________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, Judge (oral): Petitioner herein, who at present is working as TGT (Hindi) at GSSS Karyali, Block Sunni, District Shimla, H.P., has approached this Court in the instant proceedings, seeking directions to respondents to consider and decide his pending representation (Annexure P-3), whereby he has prayed for his transfer from afore station, which is claimed to be difficult area, to one of the station of his choice, as detailed in the representation, on the ground that he has already completed normal tenure of posting in 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. Vishal Panwar, learned Additional Advocate General. Mr. Panwar fairly states that pending representation, if not already decided, shall be decided expeditiously, in accordance with law. 1Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 3. Since it is quite apparent from the averments contained in the petition as well as pleadings adduced on record by the petitioner that petitioner has already completed normal tenure of posting at the present place of posting, which admittedly falls in difficult area, coupled with the fact that Transfer Policy, formulated by the Government of Himachal Pradesh, enables an employee to seek transfer after his/her having completed normal tenure of posting in hard/difficult/tribal area, this Court sees no impediment in 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-3) 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. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. (Sandeep Sharma), Judge November 14, 2025 (Rajeev Raturi)