IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.16497 of 2025 Date of Decision: 6.1.2026 _____________________________________________________________________ Rishabh Sharma ……...Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and Ors. …....Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? For the Petitioner: Mr. Vinod Chauhan, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General with Mr. Rajan Kahol, Additional Advocate General and Mr. Ravi Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General. ___________________________________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, J. (Oral) Petitioner herein, who at present is working as Tehsildar at Paonta Sahib, is aggrieved of order dated 15.10.2025, whereby he has been transferred from afore station to Tehsil Office Lagroo, District Kangra, Himachal Pradesh, against vacancy. 2. Though by way of filing reply to the petition, prayer of the petitioner has been seriously opposed by the respondents by way of filing reply, but before case at hand could be heard and decided on its own merit, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is ready and willing to join at the transferred station after 31.3.2026 because in the interregnum, he may have to look after his wife, who is also a government employee and at present is on maternity leave. - 2 - 3. While responding to aforesaid submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Rajan Kahol, learned Additional Advocate General, states that petitioner being an employee cannot dictate terms, rather he is under obligation to join at the transferred station, especially when it stands established on record that he has been successfully managing the transfer in and around present place of posting for more than three years on the strength of DO note. He further submits that on account of non-joining of the petitioner at the transferred station, work is suffering. 4. Without commenting upon merits of the case, present petition is disposed of, reserving liberty to the petitioner to file representation to the competent authority for his adjustment at a convenient station on the ground of couple case, which in turn, shall be decided by the competent authority expeditiously, preferably, within two weeks. Needless to say, authority concerned, while doing the needful in terms of instant order, shall afford an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and pass a speaking order taking note of the transfer policy, which enables an employee to seek transfer/ adjustment on the ground of couple case. Till the time representation filed by the petitioner within one week is decided, order dated 17.10.2025 passed by this Court shall remain in force. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. January 6, 2026 (Sandeep Sharma), (manjit) Judge