IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP No. 2791 of 2011 Decided on : 14.09.2011 ________________________________________________ Tashi Dolma … Petitioner Versus State of H.P. and others … Respondents. ___________________________________________________ Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice V.K. Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? 1No. For the petitioner : Mr. D.N. Sharma and Mr. R.S. Chandel, Advocates. For the respondents : Mr. P.K. Sharma, Addl. Advocate General. _____________________________________________________ V.K. Sharma, Judge (oral). The petition has been filed on the following prayers vide para 5 (i) and (ii):- “(i) That writ in the nature of certiorari may kindly be issued and order dated 28.4.2011 (Annexure P-1) may very kindly be quashed and set aside. (ii) That writ in the nature of mandamus may kindly be issued, directing the Respondent to allow the petitioner to work as Junior Basic Teacher in Govt. Senior Secondary School Bajasalana, K-1, District 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? No. 2 Mandi, H.P. till the completion of her normal tenure.” 2. In reply, the respondents have taken the following stand vide para 3(ii) and (iii):- “(ii) That in reply to this para it is submitted that the petitioner remained posted at Government Primary school, Kao (K-1) from 16-08-2000 to 01-03-2009 and thereafter on 02-03-2009 the petitioner was transferred to Government Primary school, Bagasaana (K-I) and remained posted there till date and the distance between these schools is within radius of 4 K.M. As such the petitioner has completed more than 10 years within the radius of 4 K.M. (iii) That this para calls for no submission in view of the facts and submissions as submitted in the preceding paras. However, it is submitted that the transfer of the petitioner from Government Primary School, Bagasalana (K-I) to Government Primary School, Tarej (K-I) has been made with the prior approval of the competent authority by clubbing the previous stay of the petitioner.” 3. In view of the above reply, in case the petitioner still has any surviving grievance, she may make a detailed representation supported by documents along with copy of this judgment to the respondents/competent authority within one month from today, who shall consider and decide the same within 3 next one month, by exploring the possibility of adjusting the petitioner appropriately against an existing vacancy in a nearby school, after affording an opportunity of being heard to her, if so desired. Needless to say that the existing arrangement shall continue till then. 4. The petition stands disposed of, so also pending application(s), if any. Copy dasti. (V.K. Sharma) Judge. September 14, 2011. (Lsp)