IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.1035 of 2026 Date of Decision: 09.01.2026 ____________________________________________________________ Ghanshyam …….Petitioner Versus State of H.P. and Others ….Respondents ____________________________________________________________ Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? 1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Diwan Singh Negi, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Rajan Kahol, Additional Advocate General, with Mr. Ravi Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General, for State. ____________________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, Judge (oral): Petitioner herein, who at present is working as ADO at SC Section, Sundernagar, under SDSCO, Sarkaghat, District Mandi, HP, is aggrieved of order dated 03.01.2026, whereby he has been transferred from present place of posting to Circle Jalog, Dev. Block Basantpur, District Shimla, vice respondent No.3. 2. Though it has been fairly admitted at the behest of petitioner that he has already completed normal tenure of posting at present place of posting, but since he is left with less than two years of service, challenge has been laid to impugned transfer order on the ground that Transfer Policy, formulated by the Government of Himachal Pradesh, clearly provides that person nearing retirement shall not be transferred or if transferred, shall be given station of his choice. 2. Having regard to the nature of prayer made in the instant petition and order proposed to be passed, this Court sees no necessity to 1Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 call for the reply on behalf of the respondents, who are otherwise represented by Mr. Rajan Kahol, learned Additional Advocate General. Mr. Kahol states that petitioner has been relieved from the present place of posting and at his place, private-respondent has joined. Since petitioner has already completed normal tenure of posting at Sundernagar, this Court sees no reason to interfere with the impugned transfer order, however, having taken note of the fact that he is to retire within two years, coupled with the fact that Transfer Policy, formulated by the Government of Himachal Pradesh, enables an employee nearing retirement to seek transfer/adjustment at convenient station, this Court, deems it fit to dispose of the present petition, reserving liberty to the petitioner to file representation to the competent authority within a period of two days, which in-turn shall be decided by the afore authority expeditiously, preferably within a period of ten days. Ordered accordingly. 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. Till the time, representation, if filed within two days is not decided by the competent authority, petitioner shall not be compelled to join at the transferred station. Pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed of. (Sandeep Sharma), Judge January 09, 2026 (Rajeev Raturi)