2025:HHC:6821 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.3919 of 2025 Date of Decision: 20.03.2025 _____________________________________________________________________ Neelam Kumari ……...Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh & Ors. …....Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? For the Petitioner: Mr. Umesh Kanwar, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General, 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 is a physically disabled person and at present is working as TGT (Arts) at Government Boys Sr. Sec. School, Kotkhai, District Shimla, Himachal Pradesh, has approached this Court in the instant proceedings, seeking therein direction to the respondents to consider and decide the representation, whereby she has prayed for transfer from present place of posting to one of the stations of her choice on account of her having completed normal tenure of posting. 2. Careful perusal of pleadings adduced on record by the petitioner, which are duly supported by an affidavit, reveals that petitioner herein, who is a physically disabled person, was appointed as TGT (Arts) at Government Boys Sr. Sec. School, Kotkhai, District Shimla, Himachal Pradesh on 07.09.2021. Though, on 20.10.2023 services of the petitioner were regularized, but yet she was not transferred to some other station. Since petitioner has already completed normal tenure of posting at present place of posting, she has filed representation to the competent authority for her transfer, but since no heed is being paid to the same, she is compelled to approach this Court in the instant proceedings. 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 since services of the petitioner were regularized on 15.07.2024, she cannot be stated to have been completed normal tenure of posting, however, this Court is not impressed with the aforesaid submission of Mr. Ravi Chauhan, learned Deputy Advocate General, for the reason that petitioner, may be on contract basis, was appointed in the school concerned in the year 2021 and since then, she has been working there continuously. Transfer Policy, if perused in its entirety, nowhere makes any distinction between employees appointed on contract or regular basis, rather simply provides that employee after his/her having completed 2 normal tenure of posting can be transferred to some other station, coupled with the fact that she is a physically disabled and her husband is also TGT at some other station. In view of above, there appears to be no impediment in issuing directions to the respondents to consider and decide the representation of the petitioner. 3. 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-4) filed by the petitioner expeditiously, preferably within a period of four weeks from today. Ordered accordingly. Needless to say, authority concerned, while doing the needful in terms of instant order, shall afford an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner and pass appropriate orders thereupon taking note of Transfer Policy formulated by Government of Himachal Pradesh. Pending applications, if any, stand disposed of. March 20, 2025 (Sandeep Sharma), (sunil) Judge 3