TANZIN SAMPHEL Vs. STATE OF H.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Notice. Mr. Y.P.S.Dhaulta, learned Additional Advocate General, accepts service of notice on behalf of the respondents. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, matter is heard at this stage.

(2.) Petitioner is presently serving as Peon in the office of the Deputy Commissioner Lahaul & Spiti at Keylong. He had instituted Tanzin Samphel Vs. State of HP and others[CWP No.9074 of 2025 decided on 30/5/2025.] with the grievance that he is serving as Peon in the aforesaid office since 2017; He belongs to Spiti/Kaza region; His family members are suffering from serious ailments, requiring constant care and attention; His wife is single handedly discharging all household responsibilities at Spiti/Kaza and is overburdened; There is none else in the family to look after the household a airs; Due to his posting at Keylong, petitioner is not in a position to provide any meaningful assistance to his family at Spiti/Kaza; That the petitioner had also completed his normal tenure of posting at Keylong and, therefore, is eligible to be considered for transfer to his h me region. Keeping in view the aforesaid factors, Tanzin Samphel 2 was disposed of with direction to respondent No.2/competent authority to consider petitioner's representation for redressing his aforesaid grievances vis-a-vis his transfer from Keylong to Spiti/Kaza and decide the same within the indicated timeline.

(3.) Pursuant to above, respondent No.4 considered petitioner's representation and vide office order dtd. 21/8/2025, rejected the same on the ground that no post of Peon was lying vacant at Kaza.