IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA CWP No.20106 of 2025 Decided on: 19.12. 2025 _________________________________________________________________ Jagbir Singh Chandel ....Petitioner Versus State of H.P. & Anr. …Respondents _________________________________________________________________ Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua 1 Whether approved for reporting? _________________________________________________________________ For the petitioner: Mr. Kul Bhushan Khajuria, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. Vishwadeep Sharma, Advocate General. Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge Notice. Mr. Vishwadeep Sharma, learned Additional Advocate General, accepts service of notice on behalf of the respondents. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, matter is heard at this stage. 2. Petitioner is presently serving as Lecturer (Hindi) at GSSS Rangas, District Hamirpur, H.P.. He feels aggrieved against office order dated 16.12.2025 (Annexure P-1), that 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? yes - 2 - transfers him to GSSS Guwan, District Chamba, H.P. 3. Transfer has been assailed primarily on the grounds that:- (i) The same has been effected on the basis of a U.O. note; (ii) Petitioner is due to retire on 30.04.2027. He is left with about 17 months to superannuate. In view of this, petitioner should not have been disturbed at this stage of his service career; and (iii) Petitioner has been transferred to a hard area in District Chamba, whereas in terms of Clause 12.1 of the Transfer Policy 2013, an employee left with less than five years of service, should not ordinarily be sent to hard areas. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is still continuing to serve at his present place of posting as none else has been transferred at his place. 4. The petition tabulates the incumbency position of the petitioner, in terms of which, it appears that petitioner has mostly served in District Hamirpur, even though he belongs to State Cadre. The petitioner, therefore, is liable to transferred from his place of posting as he has completed his normal tenure even at this place. However, taking note of the fact that petitioner is left with about 17 months to - 3 - superannuate and in terms of applicable transfer policy, an employee with less than five years to serve, is not ordinarily to be posted in hard area and considering the fact that under the impugned order, petitioner has been transferred to a hard area, it would be appropriate to dispose of this writ petition with liberty reserved to the petitioner to prefer a representation to respondent No.1/Competent Authority for his suitable adjustment within a period of one week with direction to respondent No.1/Competent Authority to consider and decide the aforesaid representation within a period of two weeks, thereafter. Copy of decision so taken, be communicated to the petitioner. Till the decision of the representation, operation of office order dated 16.12.2025 (Annexure P-1) shall remain stayed qua the petitioner. It is made clear that in case petitioner does not represent within the aforesaid period, the interim protection granted to him under this order shall automatically stand vacated. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also stand disposed of. Jyotsna Rewal Dua Judge December 19, 2025 R.Atal - 4 -