IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP(T) No. 1769 of 2008 Decided on: 6th May, 2009 Roshan lal Sharma …..Petitioner. VERSUS State of H.P. & Ors. …..Respondents. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice R.B. Misra, Judge. The Hon’ble Mr.Justice Surjit Singh, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioner : Mr Dilip Sharma, Advocate. For Respondents : Mr P.K. Sharmal, Addl. AG with Mr.J.K. Verma, Dy. AG for respondent No.1 . Mr. Jagdish Thakur, Advocate for respondent No.2. Per Surjit Singh, Judge (Oral) Heard and gone through the record. Petitioner has been posted at Karsog , a Sub Divisional headquarter of a Sub Division of Mandi District, as Agricultural Development Officer for the last 6 years. Once, in the year 2005 he was transferred from Karsog to Lahaul Spiti. He challenged his transfer by filing Original Application before the then State Administrative Tribunal. His transfer was stayed by the learned Tribunal. Finally, the 1 Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the Judgment? Original Application was dismissed. Petitioner filed writ petition against that order in this court under articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India. During the pendency of that writ petition, impugned transfer order of the petitioner was withdrawn and he was allowed to continue to work at Karsog. On account of that development, writ petition was dismissed by this court on 12.1.2007. Petitioner has now again been transferred; this time to Spiti, vide impugned order dated 28th May, 2008 (Annexure A- 5). His plea is that he is prepared for transfer from Karsog on account of his having completed normal tenure of three years at that station, but he should be transferred to some easier station, because Karsog is a difficult sub area station and from that place he should not have been transferred to tribal area, which is more difficult. 2. We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the record. Petitioner having remained posted at Karsog, which is part of Mandi District (the district in which the petitioner has his native place), he cannot claim that he should be posted at some easier place and not at a place falling in tribal area. One of the conditions of appointment of every government servant is that he would be serving at any place within the State, including the tribal area where the government may post him. Someone has to go to the tribal area also to serve the public. We have been told that some extra money is paid to the government servants, who are posted in tribal area to compensate them for the difficulties, which they come across when stationed there. Petitioner having served for longer period than normal tenure of three years at Karsog, he cannot have any legitimate grievance against the order of his transfer to Kaza. 3. Learned counsel submits that a representation has been made by the petitioner against the impugned order of his transfer to Kaza, which is still pending. In view of this submission, we direct that before relieving the petitioner, concerned authorities shall dispose of the representation of the petitioner, by a speaking order and in any case disposal of the representation shall not be delayed beyond two weeks. Petition stands disposed of accordingly. In view of the disposal of main writ petition, pending application(s), if any, are also disposed of. ( R.B. Misra ), Judge. ( Surjit Singh ), Judge. 6th May, 2009(sl)