IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.3661 of 2025 Date of Decision: 18.03.2025 _______________________________________________________ Deepika Thakur …….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 Kaushal, Advocate. 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): Through instant petition very innocuous prayer has been made on behalf of the petitioner to issue direction to the respondents to consider and decide the pending representation of the petitioner, whereby she has sought her transfer from the present place of posting to other station on account of adverse family circumstances. 2. Careful perusal of the averments contained in the petition, which is duly supported by an affidavit as well as documents annexed therewith reveal that the petitioner, who is a staff nurse, has been working at CHC Nihri, Block Rohanda, District Mandi, Himachal Pradesh. Since petitioner has completed her normal tenure of posting 1Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 in the aforesaid station, she has filed representation to the competent authority to transfer her from aforesaid station to other station on the ground that there is none to take care of her school going children, who at present are studying in school situate at Sundernagar, District Mandi, Himachal Pradesh. 3. Since petitioner has already completed her normal tenure of posting at present place of posting coupled with the fact that there is a provision in the transfer policy to consider the request of an employee for transfer on account of adverse family circumstances, this Court sees no impediment in issuing direction to the respondents to consider and decide the pending representation (Annexure P-1) of the petitioner expeditiously, preferably within a period of two 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 detailed order thereupon, taking note of transfer policy. Liberty is reserved to the petitioner to file appropriate proceedings in appropriate court of law, if she still remains aggrieved. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. (Sandeep Sharma), Judge March 18, 2025 (shankar)