2025:HHC:5362 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.3287 of 2025 Date of Decision: 10.03.2025 _____________________________________________________________________ Pooja Kumari ……...Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh & Anr. …....Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? For the Petitioner: Mr. Sanjeev Bhushan, Senior Advocate, with Mr. Rajesh Kumar, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. Rajan Kahol, Mr. B.C Verma & Mr. Vishal Panwar, Additional Advocate Generals, with Mr. Ravi Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General. ___________________________________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, J. (Oral) Petitioner herein, who at present is working as TGT (Medical) at Government Senior Secondary School Marighat, Sirmaur, Himachal Pradesh, has approached this Court in the instant proceedings, seeking therein direction to the respondents to consider and decide her representation for transfer to some other station on account of adverse family circumstances. 2. It has been averred in the petition that petitioner has already completed normal tenure of posting at present place of posting and there is none in the family to look after her mother-in-law and husband, who are fully dependent upon her. 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. Ravi Chauhan, learned Deputy Advocate General. While accepting notice on behalf of the respondents, Mr. Ravi Chauhan, learned Deputy Advocate General, fairly states that representation (Annexure P-3) filed by the petitioner, if not already decided, shall be decided expeditiously. 4. Since there is a specific provision contained in the Transfer Policy to transfer an employee on account of adverse family circumstances, coupled with the fact that petitioner has already approached respondents by way of representation for redressal of her grievance, this Court sees no impediment in issuing direction to the respondents to consider and decide the representation filed by the petitioner in accordance with law. 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) 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, besides affording opportunity of 2 being heard to the petitioner, shall also take note of Transfer Policy, which specifically talks about transfer on the ground of adverse family circumstances as well as stations mentioned in the petition, which are going to fall vacant in the near future and pass appropriate orders. Pending applications, if any, stand disposed of. March 10, 2025 (Sandeep Sharma), (sunil) Judge 3