IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.10631 of 2025 Date of Decision: 04.07.2025 _______________________________________________________ Dr. Munish Rawat …….Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh & Ors. … Respondent Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? 1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Surinder Prakash Sharma, Advocate. For the Respondent: Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General, Mr. Rajan Kahol & 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 Ayurvedic Medical Officer at Government Ayurvedic Health Centre Tandakot, District Bilaspur, Himachal Pradesh, is aggrieved of order dated 30.06.2025 (Annexure P-1), whereby he has been transferred from afore station to Government Ayurvedic Health Centre Mehandi, District Mandi, Himachal Pradesh 2. Precisely, the grouse of the petitioner, as has been highlighted in the petition and further canvassed by Mr. Surinder Prakash Sharma, learned counsel representing the petitioner, is that impugned transfer order is not sustainable in the eye of law being issued in violation of Transfer Policy. He states that since petitioner 1Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 has not completed normal tenure at present place of posting, he could not have been transferred to the new station. He further states that otherwise also, wife of the petitioner, who is also working as Ayurvedic Medical Officer, is posted at Government Ayurvedic Health Centre Trifalghat, District Mandi, Himachal Pradesh and as such, in the event of transfer of the petitioner, he ought to have been given convenient station so that family life of petitioner does not get disturbed. 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 the reply from the respondents, who are otherwise represented by Mr. Ravi Chauhan, learned Deputy Advocate General. Mr. Chauhan, states that since petitioner has already completed normal tenure at present place of posting, no illegality can be said to have been committed by the respondents, while passing impugned transfer order. He further submitted that as per own case of the petitioner, wife of the petitioner is already posted in District Mandi and as such, it cannot be said that the respondents failed to take note of her posting while transferring the petitioner. 4. Though having taken note of the fact that petitioner has already completed normal tenure at present place of posting, coupled with the fact that he is Class-I Officer, this Court sees no reason to 3 interfere with the impugned transfer order, however, having taken note of the fact that wife of the petitioner is also working at Ayurvedic Medical Officer at Government Ayurvedic Health Centre Trifalghat, District Mandi, Himachal Pradesh, this Court, without going into the merits of the case, deems it fit to dispose of the present petition reserving liberty to the petitioner to file representation to the competent authority within two days for transfer/adjustment at convenient station, which shall be decided within ten days. Ordered accordingly. 9. Needless to say, authority concerned, while doing the needful in terms of instant order, shall afford an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner and pass appropriate orders taking note of Transfer Policy, which certainly enables an employee to seek transfer/adjustment at a convenient station on the ground of couple case. Till the time, representation, as detailed herein above, is not decided in terms of instant order, petitioner shall not be compelled to join at transferred station in terms of impugned transfer order. Pending applications, if any, stand disposed of. (Sandeep Sharma), Judge July 04, 2025 (Sunil)