IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.9411 of 2025 Date of Decision: 28.08.2025 __________________________________________________________ Dr. Ravi Sharma …….Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh & Others ….Respondents __________________________________________________________ Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? 1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Ravinder Singh Chandel, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General, with Mr. Rajan Kahol, Mr. Vishal Panwar and Mr. B.C. Verma, Additional Advocates General, with Mr. Ravi Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General, for State. Mr. Surinder Saklani, Advocate, for respondent No.3. Mr. Manish Sharma, Sr. Assistant, Ayush, H.P. Secretariat, present in person along with record. __________________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, Judge(oral): Though in terms of order dated 20.08.2025, Mr. Manish Sharma, Sr. Assistant, Ayush, H.P. Secretariat, has come present along with record, but learned counsel representing the petitioner and respondent No.3 states that they may be permitted to make representation to the competent authority for their adjustment at convenient stations. Learned counsel representing the petitioner and respondent No.3 state that since respondent No.3 has agreed to join at SDAMO, Tunuhatti, as SDAMO and petitioner is ready and willing to remain posted at SDAMO, Kandwal at Nurpur, direction may be issued 1Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 to respondents to decide their representation, if any, filed in that regard, in a time bound manner. 2. Consequently, in view of the above, present petition is disposed of, reserving liberty to both the parties to file representation within a period of two days, which in-turn shall be decided by the competent authority expeditiously, preferably, within a period of one week. Needless to say, authority concerned while deciding the representation, in terms of instant order, shall take note of amicable settlement arrived inter se parties, whereby they have decided to swap places, as detailed hereinabove. However, it is ordered that due and admissible salary, if any, shall be released to the petitioner, if not already released. Interim order, if any, stands hereby vacated. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. (Sandeep Sharma), Judge August 28, 2025 (Rajeev Raturi)