IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.10643 of 2025 Date of Decision: 15.07.2025 _______________________________________________________ Govind Ram …….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. Kulbhushan Khajuria, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. B.C.Verma, Additional Advocate General, for the respondent-State. Mr. Rajesh Parkash, Advocate, for respondent No.4. Mr ____________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, Judge(oral): Petitioner herein, who is serving as Panchayat Secretary, is aggrieved on account of non-implementation of order dated 16.04.2025 (Annexure P-2), whereby he was ordered to be transferred from Gram Panchayat, Lani Borad, Development Block Pachhad, District Sirmour, Himachal Pradesh to Gram Panchayat, Kothi Anog, Development Block Kupvi, District Shimla, Himachal Pradesh, in condonation of short stay of less than two years and in relaxation of ban on transfers. 2. In terms of order dated 04.07.2025, Mr. B.C.Verma, learned Additional Advocate General, has placed on record 1Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 instructions dated 7th July, 2025, perusal whereof reveals that it is not possible for the department to transfer the petitioner in terms of approved proposal, because in the approved proposal, current posting of said Panchayat Secretary is shown as Gram Panchayat Lani Borad, Development Block Pachhad, District Sirmour, whereas the petitioner is currently working in Gram Panchayat, Dingar Kinnar, Development Block Pachhad. Apart from above, it has been further stated in the afore communication that said Panchayat Secretary i.e. petitioner, has a short stay of less than one year at the current place of posting, whereas in the approved proposal, the said Panchayat Secretary has not been given exemption in short stay of less than one year. Though this Court does not find any merit in the second ground with regard to condonation of short stay, especially when the transfer order dated 16.04.2025 clearly reveals that same has been issued in condonation of short stay of less than two years, which would also include short stay of one year. However, having taken note of the fact that there is a mistake with regard to name of station given in the posting order, coupled with the fact that petitioner has already filed representation (Annexure P-1) to the competent authority, this Court deems it fit to dispose of the present petition, with a direction to the respondents to consider and decide representation (Annexure P-1) of the petitioner expeditiously, preferably within a period of one week. 3 Ordered accordingly. Needless to say, authority concerned, while doing the needful in terms of instant order, shall afford an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and pass appropriate order. Till the time, representation is not decided, the station mentioned therein shall not be fill up, if not already filled. However, the department shall be at liberty to post the petitioner at one of the stations, if he is found eligible to be posted at that station. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. 2. p (Sandeep Sharma), Judge July 15,2025 (shankar)