IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.6895 of 2023 Date of Decision:23.05.2025 _______________________________________________________ Om Prakash …….Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh & another … Respondents _______________________________________________________ Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? 1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Ajeet Singh Saklani, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Rajan Kahol, Mr. Vishal Panwar and Mr. B.C.Verma, Additional Advocate Generals, with Mr. Ravi Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General. ____________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, Judge(oral): Petitioner herein, who at present is working as JOA(IT) is aggrieved of Office order dated 22.09.2023 (Annexure P-3), whereby he came to be transferred from Sub Tehsil Office, Pangna to Sub Tehsil Office, Bagachanogi, District Mandi, Himachal Pradesh. 2. Precisely, the grouse of the petitioner as has been highlighted in the petition and further canvassed by learned counsel for the petitioner, is that though petitioner has not completed normal tenure of posting at present place of posting, but yet on the basis of the D.O. Note issued by political person in favour of private respondent, Sh. Daulat Ram, his transfer has been shown to be done 1Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 on administrative grounds. Taking note of the fact that petitioner was transferred within short span of his joining at Sub Tehsil Office, Pangna, this Court vide order dated 26.09.2023, stayed the operation of aforesaid order, as a result thereof, petitioner is continuing in Sub Tehsil Office, Pangna. 3. Pursuant to notices issued in the instant proceeding, respondent-State has filed reply, perusal whereof clearly reveals that prior to petitioner’s posting to Sub Tehsil Office, Pangna, he was working in Tehsil Office Indora, District, Kangra, Himachal Pradesh. Petitioner himself made representation to the competent authority for his transfer from afore station to Sub Tehsil Office, Bagachanogi vice one Sh. Ashish Kumar. Since afore proposal given by the petitioner as well as Sh. Ashish Kumar was not feasible, competent authority, while accepting the prayer made on behalf of the petitioner from the Office of Sub Divisional Officer(C), Karsog, ordered his transfer to Sub Tehsil Office, Pangna vide order dated 29.08.2023. Since 29.11.2023, petitioner had been working in Sub Tehsil Office, Pangna, but again vide order dated 22nd September, 2023, he came to be transferred from afore station to Sub Tehsil Office, Bagachanogi, District Mandi, Himachal Pradesh. Though, it has been claimed on behalf of the petitioner that he has not completed normal tenure of posting at present place of posting, but it is not in dispute 3 that prior to petitioner’s posting at Sub Tehsil Office, Bagachanogi, District Mandi, Himachal Pradesh, petitioner remained posted in the office of Sub Divisional Officer(C) Karsog for more than three years. Sub Tehsil Office, Bagachanogi, District Mandi is not very far from the Office of Sub Divisional Officer(C), Karsog before his being posted at Sub Tehsil Office, Bagachanogi, petitioner was posted at Sub Tehsil Office, Pangna, which is also very close to Karsog. It if is so, it can be safely concluded that petitioner remained posted within vicinity of Sub Divisional Officer(C) Karsog and Sub Tehsil Pangna, District Mandi for more than three years no illegality otherwise can be said to have been committed by the respondents, while ordering transfer of the petitioner. 4. Though, learned counsel for the petitioner argued that since transfer of the petitioner has been made on the basis of D.O. Note issued by a political person, impugned transfer order needs to interfered, but this Court having taken note of the fact that petitioner has already completed normal tenure of posting at present place of posting, coupled with the fact that proposal to transfer petitioner from Sub Divisional Officer(C) Karsog to Sub Tehsil, Bagachanogi came to be initiated on the basis of representation made by the petitioner, whereby he sought mutual transfer from afore station to Sub Tehsil Office, Bagachanogi. Since proposal mooted by the petitioner was not 4 feasible, he came to be adjusted at Sub Tehsil Office Pangna and petitioner never objected to his posting at Sub Tehsil Office, Pangna, but since after his being posted at Pangna, one vacancy of JOA(IT) became available in Sub Tehsil Office, Bagachanogi, District Mandi qua which, petitioner himself had prayed, there appears to be no justification for this Court to interfere in the impugned transfer order and as such, same is upheld. 5. Moreover, this Court finds that after passing of impugned transfer order dated 22.09.2023, petitioner has remained posted at Sub Tehsil Office, Pangna on account of order dated 26.09.2023 passed by this Court, thereby staying the operation of impugned transfer order, meaning thereby even at Pangna petitioner has almost completed three years. 6. Consequently, in view of the above, the present petition is disposed of, reserving liberty to the petitioner to file representation to the competent authority within a period of one week, thereby praying for his adjustment at a station convenient to him on account of adverse family circumstances, which came to be apprised to this Court during the proceedings of the case, which in turn, shall be decided by the competent authority within a period of ten days, taking note of transfer policy formulated by Government of Himachal Pradesh, which certainly enables an employee to seek transfer on 5 account of adverse family circumstances. Till the time representation, if any, filed by the petitioner within a period of one week, is not decided by the competent authority, interim order dated 26.09.2023 passed by this Court shall remain in force. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. p (Sandeep Sharma), Judge May 23,2025 (shankar)