2025:HHC:9950 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.5565 of 2025 Date of Decision: 09.04.2025 _____________________________________________________________________ Brahm Dutt ……...Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh & Ors. …....Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? For the Petitioner: Mr. Hemant Kumar Thakur, Advocate, vice Mr. Rajesh K.Sharma, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General, Mr. Rajan Kahol, Mr. Vishal Panwar & Mr. B.C. Verma, Additional Advocate Generals, with Mr. Ravi Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General, for respondents-State. ___________________________________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, J. (Oral) Petitioner herein, who at present is working as JBT at Government Primary School Kaflanu, Education Block Sangrah, District Sirmaur, Himachal Pradesh, which is hard area, has approached this Court in the instant proceedings, seeking therein direction to the respondents to consider and decide his pending representation (Annexure P-2), whereby he has prayed for his transfer from present place of posting to one of the stations, as detailed in the representation, on account of his having completed normal tenure of posting in hard area. 2. It has been averred in the petition, which is duly supported by an affidavit that since his initial appointment in 2014, petitioner has been serving in hard area, but yet he has not been transferred to one of the stations of his choice in terms of Transfer Policy formulated by the Government of Himachal Pradesh, which admittedly provides for transfer of an employee from hard area to soft area after his/her having completed normal tenure of posting i.e. two winters and three summers. In the case at hand, petitioner was appointed as JBT at Government Primary School Kaflanu, Education Block Sangrah, District Sirmaur, Himachal Pradesh on 26.02.2014, meaning thereby, he has already completed more than eleven years in hard area and as such, prayer, if any, made on his behalf of transfer deserves to be considered. 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. Rajan Kahol, learned Additional Advocate General. Mr. Kahol, fairly states that representation (Annexure P-2) filed by the petitioner, if not already decided, shall be decided 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 a direction to the respondents to consider and decide the 2 pending representation (Annexure P-2) filed by the petitioner expeditiously, preferably within a period of two weeks 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 thereafter taking note of Transfer Policy formulated by the Government of Himachal Pradesh. Pending applications, if any, stand disposed of. April 09, 2025 (Sandeep Sharma), (sunil) Judge 3