IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA CWP No.8920 of 2025 Decided on: 28th May, 2025 _________________________________________________________________ Dinesh Kumar ....Petitioner Versus State of H.P. & Ors. …Respondents _________________________________________________________________ Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua 1 Whether approved for reporting? _________________________________________________________________ For the petitioner: Mr. Dhiraj Thakur and Ms. Priyanka Chandel, Advocates. For the respondents: Ms. Menka Raj Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General, for respondents No. 1 and 2 . Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge Notice confined to respondents No.1 and 2, which is accepted by Ms. Menka Raj Chauhan, learned Deputy Advocate General. In view of nature of order being passed hereinafter neither the reply is required to be called from respondents No.1 and 2, nor notice is required to be issued to respondents No.4 to 6. With consent of learned counsel for the parties, 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? yes - 2 - matter is heard at this stage. 2. Petitioner is serving as Drug Inspector in the office of Chief Medical Officer (CMO) Bilaspur. He feels aggrieved against the notification dated 26.05.2025, which transfers him from the office of CMO Bilaspur, District Bilaspur to the office of CMO Kinnaur, District Kinnaur. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that impugned is a triangular transfer. Under the impugned notification, respondent No.5 has been transferred to the place of respondent No.6 and respondent No.6 has been transferred to the place of the petitioner, who has been transferred to the office of CMO Kinnaur. Learned counsel further submits that transfer has been ordered on the basis of a D.O. note issued by respondent No.4 for the benefit of respondent No.5. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that previously also, petitioner had been ordered to be disturbed from his present place of posting on the basis of D.O. note issued by respondent No.4, however, on account of petitioner’s laying challenge to the aforesaid transfer/non- implementation thereof by the respondents themselves, the - 3 - petitioner continued to serve in the office of CMO Bilaspur. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner fairly submits that petitioner remained posted with CMO Bilaspur w.e.f. the year 2019 and in this manner has completed much more the normal tenure. Learned counsel submits that petitioner’s wife is serving in Indian Army and currently posted at Leh. Petitioner’s brother is posted in Indian Air Force and currently posted at Pune (Maharashtra). Under these circumstances, petitioner’s transfer to Kinnaur poses great hardship to the petitioner to manage his family affairs and it will also be difficult for him to look after his children and aged parents. Learned counsel for the petitioner invited attention to Clause 5.2 of the Applicable Transfer Policy, which gives concession to the wives of soldiers, and prayed that the petitioner should also be extended same concession as his wife is in Indian Army and currently serving at Leh. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner be permitted to prefer representation to respondent No.1/Competent Authority, who be directed to consider and decide the same in accordance with law keeping in view - 4 - petitioner’s adverse family circumstance in a time bound schedule. Learned Deputy Advocate General has no objection for the same. 5. In view of above, this writ petition is disposed of by permitting the petitioner to represent to respondent No.1/Competent Authority, seeking his suitable adjustment within a period of three days, who within one week thereafter, shall consider and decide the same in accordance with the applicable transfer policy keeping in view petitioner’s family circumstances and submissions made by him as noticed above. Copy of order so passed, be communicated to the petitioner. Till such time, petitioner shall not be compelled to join at the transferred station and he shall be at liberty to avail leave of the kind due. It is made clear that in case petitioner does not represent within the aforesaid period, the protection granted to him under this order shall stand automatically vacated. - 5 - Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also stand disposed of. Jyotsna Rewal Dua Judge May 28, 2025 R.Atal