IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No. 4327 of 2025 Date of Decision: 1.4.2025 _____________________________________________________________________ Parveen Kumar ……...Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and Ors. …....Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? For the Petitioner: Mr. Gambhir Singh Chauhan, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General with Mr. Rajan Kahol, Mr. Vishal Panwar and Mr. B.C. Verma, Additional Advocates General and Mr. Ravi Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General. ___________________________________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, J. (Oral) Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with order dated 3.2.2025, issued under the signature of Director (Elementary Education), Himachal Pradesh, whereby representation having been filed by the petitioner in terms of order dated 13.12.2024, passed by this Court in CWP No. 15276 of 2024, titled Praveen Kumar v. State of Himachal Pradesh and Ors., came to be rejected on the ground that petitioner never served tribal/hard area, petitioner has approached this Court in the instant proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying therein to set-aside aforesaid order. - 2 - 2. Precisely, the grouse of the petitioner, as has been highlighted in the petition and further canvassed by Mr. Gambhir Singh Chauhan, learned counsel for the petitioner is that impugned order passed by the respondents is totally absurd because same is not based upon true facts. He states that prior to passing of impugned order, petitioner has already served in hard area i.e. Government Senior Secondary School, Drabil, Tehsil Shillai, District Sirmaur, Himachal Pradesh. He states that since petitioner has already served in hard area, he cannot be retransferred to the hard area. 3. Precisely, the facts of the case as emerge from the record are that vide letter dated 3.11.2016, petitioner came to be appointed as TGT (Non-Medical) and in that capacity, he joined at GSSS Drabil, Tehsil Shillai, District Sirmaur, Himachal Pradesh. Subsequently, his services were regularized in the year 2020 and thereafter, he was posted at Haripurkhol, Tehsil Paonta Sahib. Since the date of his regularization, petitioner has been working as TGT (Non-Medical) GHS Gulabgarh u/c GSSS Jamni Wala, Tehsil Paonta Sahib. After his having completed normal tenure of posting at aforesaid station, petitioner made a representation to the respondents for his adjustment/transfer to a station near to his native place (Annexure P- 3). By way of representation of the petitioner besides claiming completion of normal tenure of posting at the present place, it was also apprised to the respondent that his mother is suffering from paralysis - 3 - and as such, requires constant care, however, such representation was not decided, as a result thereof, petitioner approached this Court in CWP No.15276 of 2024, which came to be disposed of vide order dated 13.12.2024, with direction to the respondents to decide the representation within four weeks. (Annexure P-5). 4. Pursuant to aforesaid direction, respondents by way of impugned order dated 3.2.2025 (Annexure P-6), rejected the representation on the ground that petitioner never served hard area in his service career. Since petitioner has already served hard area prior to issuance of transfer order, he approached this Court in the instant proceedings for quashing of impugned order. 5. Having taken note of the aforesaid submission made by the petitioner with regard to his having served hard area, prior to issuance of impugned transfer order, this Court vide order dated 25.3.2025, called upon the learned Additional Advocate General, to have instructions “whether the Government Senior Secondary School, Drabil, Tehsil Shillai, District Sirmaur, Himachal Pradesh, falls under hard/tribal area or not” 6. Pursuant to vide order passed by this court, learned Additional Advocate General has placed on record communication dated 29.3.2025, issued under the signature of Director (Elementary Education), which is taken on record. - 4 - 7. Careful perusal of aforesaid communication clearly reveals that petitioner has served in the Government Senior Secondary School Drabil, Tehsil Shillai, District Sirmaur, Himachal Pradesh w.e.f. 22.11.2016 to 17.12.2019, which falls in sub cadre, meaning thereby, aforesaid area is hard/difficult area. Since petitioner has already served in hard/difficult area, there appears to be merit in the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that respondents disposed of representation filed by the petitioner in terms of order dated 3.2.2025 (Annexure P-6), passed in CWP No. 15276 of 2024 in most mechanical manner and without there being application of mind. 8. Careful of aforesaid order clearly reveals that representation of the petitioner came to be rejected on the ground that he has never served hard area, however such finding recorded by the competent authority vide impugned order is not based upon correct facts. As per instructions dated 29.3.2025, issued under the signatures of Director (Elementary Education), petitioner has already served Government Senior Secondary School Drabil District Sirmaur w.e.f. 22.11.2016 to 17.12.2019. If it is so, it cannot be said that he has not served the hard area. Since representation having been filed petitioner has been solely rejected on the ground as detailed herein above, which is otherwise not tenable for the reasons stated herein - 5 - above, impugned order being not sustainable in the eye of law, deserves to be quashed. 9. Consequently, in view of the above, present petition is allowed and impugned order dated 3.2.2025 is quashed and set-aside with a direction to the respondents to consider and decide representation filed by the petitioner afresh taking note of the fact that petitioner has already served in hard area during his service career. Representation of the petitioner shall be decided expeditiously, preferably, within two weeks. Ordered accordingly. Needless to say, authority concerned while doing the needful shall afford an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and pass appropriate order taking note of the transfer policy, which admittedly, provides for transfer of an employee on account of adverse family circumstances. In the aforesaid terms, present petition is disposed of alongwith pending applications, if any. April 1, 2025 (Sandeep Sharma), (manjit) Judge