2025:HHC:4895 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.3065 of 2025 Date of Decision: 05.03.3035 _______________________________________________________ Ram Dass …….Petitioner Versus Himachal Pradesh State Electricity Board Limited & others … Respondents _______________________________________________________ Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? 1 For the Petitioner: Ms. Aashima Premy, Proxy Counsel vice Mr. Vikas Rajput, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Rajat Thakur, Proxy Counsel vice Mr. Rahul Thakur, Advocate. ____________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, Judge(oral): Through instant petition, petitioner has made very innocuous prayer to issue direction to the respondents to consider and decide his pending representation (Annexure P-3) for his transfer from difficult area/ sub cadre to soft area. 2. Precisely, the grouse of the petitioner as has been highlighted in the petition and further canvassed by Ms. Aashima Premy, Proxy counsel, is that though petitioner, who at present is working as Junior Engineer has completed his normal tenure of posting at Electrical Section Tikken under Electrical Sub Division 1Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 2025:HHC:4895 Barot, District Mandi, Himachal Pradesh, which falls in Chuhar Ghati of District Mandi, but yet his prayer for transfer to soft area or one of the station of his choice is not being considered. 3. 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. Rajat Thakur, learned Proxy counsel, who states that representation, if any pending, shall be decided expeditiously. 4. It is quite apparent from the averments contained in the petition as well as documents annexed therewith, that petitioner herein has been working in difficult/sub cadre area for more than seven years and as such, he is entitled to be transferred to soft area or one of the station of his choice as such, there appears to be no impediment in issuing direction to the respondents to consider and decide the pending representation of the petitioner expeditiously. 5. 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 pending representation (Annexure P-3) of the petitioner expeditiously, preferably within a period of six weeks. Ordered accordingly. Needless to say, authority concerned, while doing the needful in 3 2025:HHC:4895 terms of instant order, shall afford an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and pass detailed order thereupon taking note of transfer policy, which admittedly provides for transfer from hard area to soft area after completion of normal tenure of posting. Liberty is reserved to the petitioner to file appropriate proceedings in appropriate court of law, if he still remains aggrieved. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. p (Sandeep Sharma), Judge March 05, 2025 (shankar)