IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.4569 of 2025 Date of Decision:13.05.2025 _______________________________________________________ Smt. Yadvindri …….Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh & others … Respondents _______________________________________________________ Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? 1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Arun Kumar and Ms. Muskan, Advocates. For the Respondents: Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General with Mr. Rajan Kahol, Mr. Vishal Panwar and Mr. B.C.Verma, Additional Advocate Generals and Mr. Ravi Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General. ____________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, Judge(oral): Petitioner herein, who at present is working as TGT(Arts) on regular basis at Government High School, Bhogra, Tehsil Theog, District Shimla, Himachal Pradesh w.e.f. 22.02.2022, has approached this Court in the instant proceedings seeking therein direction to the respondents to consider and decide her representation (Annexure P-2), wherein she has prayed for her transfer from afore school to one of the stations of her choice, as detailed in the representation, on account of the fact that she has 1Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 already completed normal tenure of posting at present place of posting. 2. It is averred in the petition, which is duly supported by an affidavit, that Government High School Bhogra, Tehsil Theog falls within category ‘C’ (difficult/hard area) prescribed under Comprehensive Guiding Principles-2013 for regulating the transfer of State Government Employees. It is further averred in the petition that place of posting of the petitioner is at a distance of about 150 Km from her native village and bus facility is available upto Dharampur under Tehsil Theog and thereafter, she is required to walk on foot about 9 Km to reach the Government High School, Bhogra. Since husband of the petitioner works in Ludhiana (Punjab), there is none to take care of in-laws of the petitioner and as such, she has filed representation to the competent authority seeking her transfer to one of the stations, as detailed in the representation on sympathetically ground. 3. Having regard to the nature of the prayer and order proposed to be passed, this Court sees no necessity to call for reply on behalf of the respondents, who are otherwise represented by Mr. Ravi Chauhan, learned Deputy Advocate General. Learned Deputy Advocate General, while disputing claim of the petitioner that Government High School, Bhogra falls within category ‘C,” states that representation, if not already decided, shall be decided expeditiously, 3 but petitioner cannot claim transfer merely on account of the fact that she has already completed normal tenure of posting at present place of posting. 4. Having taken note of the averments made in the petition with regard to location of the school within category ‘C’ (difficult/hard area), coupled with the fact that petitioner has already completed normal tenure of posting at present place of posting and she has made representation to the competent authority, this Court sees no impediment in issuing direction to the respondents to consider and decide the pending representation (Annexure P-2) of the petitioner in a time bound manner. Needless to say, transfer policy prescribes minimum three years at one station, meaning thereby after completion of three years at one station, petitioner can always make representation to the competent authority for her transfer on medical grounds /adverse family circumstances. In the instant case, it has been specifically averred in the petition that father- in -law of the petitioner is 83 years old and there is none to take care of him, coupled with the fact that husband of the petitioner is serving in Ludhiana (Punjab), petitioner is well within her right to approach the respondents for transfer to one of the stations of her choice, which admittedly shall be considered by the respondent/competent authority 4 strictly in terms of transfer policy formulated by the Government of Himachal Pradesh. 5. Consequently, in view of the above, this Court without going into the merits of the case, deems fit to dispose of the present petition, with a direction to the respondents to consider and decide pending representation (Annexure P-2) of the petitioner expeditiously, preferably within a period of four weeks. Ordered accordingly. Needless to say, authority concerned, while doing the needful in terms of instant order, shall afford an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and pass appropriate order, taking note of observations made in the instant order and principles laid down in the Transfer Policy formulated by the Government of Himachal Pradesh. Needless to say, petitioner, while putting in appearance to make herself available pursuant to notices given by the respondents, shall be at liberty to point out other stations, which are stated to be falling vacant in coming days. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. p (Sandeep Sharma), Judge May 13,2025 (shankar)