IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.3654 of 2025 Date of decision: 17.03.2025 Saroj Kumari. ...Petitioner. Versus State of H.P. & Ors. ...Respondents. Coram: Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? For the petitioner : Mr. Suneel Awasthi, Advocate. For the respondents : Mr. Y.P.S. Dhaulta, Additional Advocate General. Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge Notice. Mr. Y.P.S. Dhaulta, Additional Advocate General, appears and waives service of notice on behalf of the respondents. 2. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, matter is heard at this stage. 3. Petitioner is serving as Auxiliary Nurse Midwife (‘ANM’) at GAHC Harwani, Tehsil Jawalamukhi, District Kangra. Her grievance is to the office order dated 07.03.2025 that transfers her to RGGPGA College & Hospital Paprola. It appears from the pleadings that petitioner is serving at the present place ever since 2017 and thus, has completed about 1Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes -2- 8 years at the present place. Petitioner’s ground for assailing her transfer to RGGPGA College & Hospital Paprola, is her upcoming retirement within next 10 months. Therefore, petitioner invokes Clause 5.5 of the applicable Transfer Policy, which stipulates that Class-III & Class-IV official likely to retire within two years, as far as possible should be posted in convenient places/stations subject to vacancy. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that no one else has been posted in place of the petitioner at GAHC Harwani, Tehsil Jawalamukhi, District Kangra. 4. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner would be satisfied, in case she is permitted to make a representation to respondent No.1/ Competent Authority seeking her adjustment/cancellation of transfer order, in view of her pending retirement, whereafter, the competent authority be directed to consider and decide the same in accordance with law within a time-bound schedule. 5. Looking to the nature of the grievance raised in this writ petition, the petitioner is permitted to prefer a representation to respondent No.1/competent authority -3- within four days from today. In case, such a representation is so preferred, the competent authority shall consider and decide the same, in accordance with law, within further period of ten days. The order so passed shall also be communicated to the petitioner. Till the decision of the representation, the impugned order shall not be implemented qua the petitioner. It is made clear that in case petitioner fails to represent within the aforesaid period, the aforesaid protection granted to the petitioner shall stand automatically vacated. The writ petition stands disposed of in the above terms, so also the pending miscellaneous application(s), if any. Jyotsna Rewal Dua 17th March, 2025 Judge (Pardeep)