IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.7043 of 2025 Date of Decision: 30.4.2025 _____________________________________________________________________ Narender Kumar ……...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. Sanjeev Bhushan, Senior Advocate with Mr. Sparsh Bhushan, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General with Mr. Rajan Kahol and Mr. B.C. Verma, Additional Advocates General and Mr. Ravi Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General, for State. ___________________________________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, J. (Oral) Petitioner herein, who at present is working as Principal, at Government Senior Secondary School, Mair, District Hamirpur, Himachal Pradesh, is aggrieved of impugned transfer order dated 24.4.2025 (Annexure P-2), whereby he has been transferred from aforesaid station to Government Senior Secondary School Raipur (Malan da Pind) District Una, Himachal Pradesh, vice Ms. Poonam Sharma. 2. Precisely, the grouse of the petitioner, as has been highlighted in the petition and further canvassed by Mr. Sparsh Bhushan, learned counsel for the petitioner is that since wife of the petitioner is also working as Lecturer (English) in Government Senior - 2 - Secondary School Domehar (Kandaghat) District Solan, Himachal Pradesh, petitioner could not have been transferred from present place of posting to transferred station, rather taking note of the couple case, he could be at best transferred to Government Senior Secondary School Kandaghat or places as detailed in the writ petition. 3. Having regard to the nature of prayer and order proposed to be passed in the instant petition, this Court sees no necessity to call for reply from the respondents, who are otherwise represented by Mr. B.C. Verma, learned Additional Advocate General. While accepting notices on behalf of the respondents, Mr. Verma, fairly states that it is not in dispute that petitioner has already completed normal tenure at present place of posting and as such, no illegality can be said to have been committed by the respondents in making transfer of the petitioner to some other station, however he fairly states that in case petitioner intends to get him transferred to a station where his wife is posted, he can make representation to the competent authority, which shall be decided expeditiously. 4. 4. Consequently, in view of the above, this Court without going into the merits of the case deems it fit to dispose of the present petition with a direction that in case petitioner files representation to the competent authority within a period of two days, same shall be decided expeditiously, preferably within a period of one week. Ordered accordingly. Needless to say, authority concerned, while doing the - 3 - 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 or cancellation of transfer on account of couple case. Till the time, representation, if any, filed within two days, is decided by the competent authority, petitioner shall not be compelled to join at the transferred station. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. April 30, 2025 (Sandeep Sharma), (manjit) Judge