IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP No. 1299 of 2010. Decided on: 26th July, 2010. Suman Lata Chauhan. ….. Petitioner. Versus State of H.P. and others. …… Respondents. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kurian Joseph, Chief Justice The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kuldip Singh, Judge. For the petitioner : Mr. C.N. Singh, Advocate. For the Respondents : Mr. R.K. Sharma, Sr. Addl. Advocate General, for respondents No.1 to 3. Mr. J.S. Bagga, Advocate, for respondent No.4. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Justice Kurian Joseph, C.J. (Oral) The petitioner is aggrieved by Annexure P-3, order of transfer, whereby the petitioner has been transferred from HSC Motibag to HSC Madholghat. She is a female health worker. The petitioner is aggrieved since she has been transferred within 14 months of her transfer to the present station. On various medical grounds also, as can be seen from Annexure P-4 onwards, the petitioner submits that it will be difficult for her to work at the transferred station. 2. The learned Senior Addl. Advocate General submits the petitioner has been in and around Shimla since the year 2000. But it is seen from the reply that the 4th 2 respondent also had been working in and around Shimla for more than 20 years. It is also submitted that there are several persons, who have longer stay in and around Shimla than the petitioner. These aspects are not referred to in the reply. Still further it is submitted that the 4th respondent had only completed three months at the present station. According to the 4th respondent, she had already joined the present station. But the petitioner submits that she has not been relieved so far. Be that as it may. The reply of the State does not refer to the submissions regarding the longer stay and longer stay particularly of the 4th respondent, even assuming the petitioner had to be transferred. There is also no reference to the medical grounds taken by the petitioner. Therefore, the impugned transfer order is set aside without prejudice to the liberty to the competent authority to consider the matter afresh on all relevant aspects. 3. With these observations, the writ petition is disposed of, so also the pending applications, if any. Dasti copy. (Justice Kurian Joseph), Chief Justice 26th July, 2010 ( Justice Kuldip Singh), (tr) Judge. 3