IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA CWP No. 18 67 of 2026 Decided on : 1 7 .02.2026 _______________________________________________________ Vinod Kumar ...Petitioner Versus Director of School Education & Anr. ...Respondents ________________________________________________________ Coram Hon'ble Mr. Justice Romesh Verma, Vacation Judge. Whether approved for reporting? 1 For the petitioner: Mr. Vinod Chauhan, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. R.P. Sharma, Deputy Advocate General. Romesh Verma, Judge (Oral) The petitioner has approached this Court for the following main reliefs: (i) “That the respondent authorities may kindly be directed to decide the representation Annexure P-3 in the time bound manner in the interest of justice; (ii) That the respondent department may be directed to quash and set aside the impugned transfer order dated 07.02.2026 qua the petitioner and transfer the petitioner to some convenient place that is 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 mentioned in the representation; and (iii) That the respondent may be directed to transfer the petitioner in terms of the transfer policy to the above-mentioned station.” 2. During the course of the arguments, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he shall be satisfied in case the respondents are directed to decide the representation dated 10.02.2026 (Annexure P-3) of the petitioner positively within a time-bound manner. 3. Accordingly, the present petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents/authority to decide the representation of the petitioner dated 10.02.2026 (Annexure P-3) sympathetically, keeping in view the fact that the petitioner’s daughter is 90% disabled, within a period of two weeks from today, by passing a reasoned and speaking order after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. The decision so taken shall be communicated to the petitioner forthwith. Till such time, the operation, and implementation of the impugned order dated 07.02.2026 (Annexure P-1) be kept in abeyance qua the petitioner. 4. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed anything on the merits of the case, and the 3 authority shall take a decision strictly in consonance with the provisions of law. 5. Petition stands disposed of, so also the pending application(s), if any. 1 7 th February, 2026 ( Romesh Verma ) (Shamsh Tabrez) Vacation Judge