IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA C.W.P. No. 251/2010 Date of decision: 26. 5. 2010 Tilak Raj Sood …. Petitioner Versus State of H.P. and others ……Respondents Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kurian Joseph, Chief Justice. The Hon’ble Mr. justice Surinder Singh, J. Whether approved for reporting ?1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Mukul Sood, Advocate. For the respondent : Mr. R.K Sharma, Sr. Addl. Advocate General. Justice Kurian Joseph, C.J. (Oral) The writ petition has been filed with the following prayer: (a) That the respondents may kindly be allowed the petitioner to be continue at the present place of posting i.e. Baijnath Division ( Sub Division Baijnath) Section Kandwari of H .P.P.W.D., District Kangra, H.P. 2. According to the petitioner, the transfer of the petitioner and the transfer of the private respondent is in 1 Whether the reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ?. - 2 - violation of the norms. Second contention of the petitioner is that the petitioner met with an accident and the transfer at this stage would be detrimental to his physical condition. Third contention of the petitioner is that the petitioner has only two years to retire from the service. 3. All these aspects the petitioner may point out before respondent No. 2 in which case, respondent No. 2 will be in a position to take appropriate decision. Therefore, we dispose of the writ petition as follows:- (i) In case the petitioner file representation before respondent No. 2 within two weeks, the same shall be duly considered by respondent No. 2 and shall pass appropriate orders in accordance with law within one month from the production of copy of this judgment. Till the order is passed by respondent No. 2 petitioner shall be allowed to continue at the present place of posting. The petition is disposed of, so also the pending applications, if any. Copy dasti. (Justice Kurian Joseph), Chief Justice (Justice Surinder Singh), May 26, 2010 Judge (cm)