IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA CWP No: 2235 of 2025 Decided on: 13.02.2025 Tek Chand ...Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh & Others ...Respondents Coram: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RANJAN SHARMA, VACATION JUDGE WHETHER APPROVED FOR REPORTING? No. For the petitioner : Mr. Kulwant Singh Gill, Advocate. For the respondents : Mr. Vishal Panwar, Additional Advocate General. Ranjan Sharma, Judge CMP(M) No. …………/2025 Filed in Court. Be registered. Instant application is for placing on record the additional documents i.e. Representation undated [Annexure A-4]. Since the application is formal in nature, therefore, in view of the averments made in the application is allowed and disposed of. 2 CWP No: 2235 of 2025 Petitioner, Tek Chand, Sub-Inspector [Panchayats] has come up before this Court, seeking the following relief(s):- (i). Issue a writ of certiorari to quash Annexure P-1 i.e. impugned office order dated 3.2.2025. (ii) Order(s) may kindly be passed to call for the records pertaining to the case at hand. 2. As a sequel to the challenge to the transfer orders dated 3.2.2025 (Annexure P-1) transferring the petitioner as Sub Inspector [Panchayat] from Block Development Tissa District Chamba, H.P. to Development Block, Kullu, District Kullu, the petitioner is stated to have made a representation to the respondent No.2 Director of Panchayati Raj Department, Himachal Pradesh on 11.02.2025 [Annexure P-4], which is stated to be pending wherein the petitioner has pointed out various hardships on account of transfer and has prayed for cancellation of transfer or as orally contended for adjustment nearby. 3. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner be satisfied, in case the State-Respondent No.2 Director of Panchayati Raj Department, Himachal Pradesh is directed to examine the request of cancellation and orally contended for adjustment nearby as in representation dated 11.02.2025 3 [Annexure P-4] and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law in the matter. 4. Prayer of the petitioner for claim for considering his representation being innocuous is not opposed by Learned State Counsel, except to the extent that after issuance of orders dated 3.2.2025 [Annexure P-4] the petitioner stands relieved from the present place of posting. 5. Taking into account the entirety of facts and circumstances of this case this Court directs Respondent No.2 Director of Panchayati Raj Department, Himachal Pradesh, Shimla to decide the representation [Annexure P-4], within three weeks from today after affording a personal hearing to the petitioner. However, in the interim, this Court directs the Respondents that in pursuance to the transfer order dated 03.02.2025 [Annexure P-4] since no incumbent has been posted or has joined as Sub Inspector in Block Development Tissa, District Chamba, Himachal Pradesh, respondents are directed to permit the petitioner to work in Block Development Tissa District Chamba, H.P. notwithstanding the issuance of orders dated 3.2.2025 and relieving till the decision of the representation. 4 In aforesaid terms, the instant writ petition as well as the pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also stand disposed of. (Ranjan Sharma) Vacation Judge February 13, 2025 (tm)