IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.187 of 2026 Date of Decision: 06.01.2026 _______________________________________________________ Pooja Devi …….Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and others … Respondents _______________________________________________________ Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? 1 For the Petitioner: Ms. Tim Saran Sharma, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Rajan Kahol, Additional Advocate General with Mr. Ravi Chauhan and Mr. Anish Banshtu, Deputy Advocate General. ____________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, Judge(oral): Petitioner herein, who at present is working as Shastri at Government Senior Secondary School, Sarahan, Tehsil Rampur, District Shimla, Himachal Pradesh, has approached this Court in the instant proceedings seeking therein direction to the respondents to consider and decide her pending representation (Annexure P-5), whereby she has prayed for her transfer from afore station to one of the stations as detailed in the representation on the ground of couple case as well as adverse family circumstances. 2. Having regard to the nature of prayer and order proposed to be passed, this Court sees no necessity to call for reply on behalf of the respondents, who are otherwise represented by Mr. Ravi Chauhan, learned Deputy Advocate General. Learned Deputy Advocate General states that since petitioner has not completed her 1Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 normal tenure of posting at present place of posting, prayer made on her behalf for transfer cannot be accepted. 3. True, it is that petitioner has not completed normal tenure of posting at present place of posting, but having taken note of the fact that husband of the petitioner is also working as Shastri and at present is posted at Government Senior Secondary School, Kaina, District Shimla and petitioner is six months pregnant, coupled with the fact that transfer policy formulated by the Government of Himachal Pradesh enables an employee to seek transfer/adjustment on the ground of couple case as well as adverse family circumstances, this Court, without going into the merits of the case, deems it fit to dispose of the same, with a direction to the respondents to consider and decide the pending representation (Annexure 5 )of the petitioner expeditiously, preferably within a period of four weeks. 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 order, taking note of the observations made hereinabove. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. 1. p (Sandeep Sharma), Judge January 06,2026 (shankar)