IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA CWP No. 4106 of 2011 Date of Decision : November 1 , 2011 Shami Mandhotra Petitioner Versus State of H.P. Respondent Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Karol, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 No. For the petitioner : Ms. Salochna Kaundal, Advocate. For the respondent : Mr. Ram Murti Bisht, Dy. Advocate General with Mr. Vinod Thakur, Dy. A.G. Justice Sanjay Karol, J. (Oral) Petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs:- “(i) That impugned Notification dated 13.05.2011, Annexure P-1 may kindly be quashed and set aside qua the petitioner, who is figuring at Sr. No. 10, by issuing writ of certiorari. (ii) That the respondent may kindly be directed to allow the petitioner to continue at the present place of posting i.e., Government Decree College Mandi, by issuing writ of mandamus. (iii) That entire record pertaining to this case may kindly be summoned for the kind perusal of this Hon’ble Court. Whether reports of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 (iv) That the writ petition may kindly be allowed with costs. (v) Any other writ or direction which this Hon’ble Court deems and just may also be passed in favour of the petitioner and against the respondents in the interest of justice.” 2. In terms of the impugned order dated 25.5.2011 (Annexure P-1) petitioner stands transferred from Mandi to Jogindernagar. 3. In the reply, respondents have justified transfer of the petitioner on the ground that one post of lecturer was transferred from Government College Mandi to Government College Jogindernagar and petitioner being the senior most, amongst the lecturers in Mandi was transferred along with the post. 4. Transfer and posting of an employee is solely the prerogative of the employer. There is no dispute with this proposition of law. However, State Government itself has framed a policy with regard to posting of an employee at station of his/her choice closer to the place of residence, immediately prior to retirement of an employee. Petitioner being a lady, who is to superannuate in the month of April, 2012 would be put to great hardship and inconvenience. Also in the instant case employer has no other grievance against her. 3 She has been successfully discharging her duties at Mandi. Also there is no complaint against her. It is not that no other person is otherwise available who can be posted at Jogindernagar. 5. On 3.6.2011 this Court had passed the following order:- “The petitioner submits that she has just one year left to retire from service. It is further submitted that the post of Lecturer (Economics) in Govt. Degree College, Mandi is still available. If that be so, the petitioner shall be retained there for the time being. Reply within three weeks. Post on 29.6.2011. Copy dasti.” The same is still in operation. According to the petitioner she has yet not been relieved from Mandi. 6. As such the impugned order of transfer qua the petitioner is quashed. There shall be a direction to the respondent to allow the petitioner to continue to officiate at Mandi till the date of her retirement, which according to her is in April, 2012. 7. Petition stands disposed of, so also the pending application(s), if any. Copy dasti. (Justice Sanjay Karol), Judge. November 1 , 2011 (PK)