IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.4263 of 2025 Date of Decision: 25.3.2025 _____________________________________________________________________ Inder Singh Bhardwaj & anr. ……...Petitioners Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and anr. …....Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? For the Petitioners: M/s. Vinay Mehta & Devi Singh Verma, Advocates. For the respondents: Mr. Anup Rattan, A.G. with Mr. B.C. Verma, Additional Advocate General. ___________________________________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, J. (Oral) Through instant petition, the petitioners herein, who at present are working as Block Development Officers in Block Elementary Education Sadar, Kataula, Distrit Mandi and Bagsayad, District Mandi respectively have approached this Court seeking directions for the respondents to consider and decide their joint representation for mutual transfer in terms of Clause 5.5 of Transfer Policy. 2. 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 - 2 - Mr. B.C. Verma, learned Additional Advocate General. While accepting notice on behalf of the respondents, learned Additional Advocate General, fairly states that representations (Annexure P-1 & 2) filed by the petitioners, if not already decided, shall be decided expeditiously. 3. It is not in dispute that Clause 5.5 of Transfer Policy issued by Government of Himachal Pradesh provides concession to an employee, who is likely to retire within a period of two years. In the case at hand, both the petitioners are due to retire within a period of two years and as such have approached the competent authority for their mutual transfer. 4. Consequently, in view of the above, without going into the merits of the case deems it fit to dispose of the present petition with a direction to the competent authority to consider and decide the representations (Annexure P-1 and 2) of the petitioners expeditiously, preferably within a period of three weeks. 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 petitioners and pass speaking order. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. March 25, 2025 (Sandeep Sharma) mamta Judge