2025:HHC:26776 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA LPA No.453 of 2025 Decided on: 06.08.2025 __________________________________________________________ Akshay Sharma ...Appellant. Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and another ...Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice G.S. Sandhawalia, Chief Justice Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ranjan Sharma, Judge 1Whether approved for reporting?. For the appellant: Mr. Mukul Sood and Mr. Vivek Thakur, Advocates. For the respondents: Ms. Priyanka Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General. G.S. Sandhawalia, Chief Justice[Oral] CMP No. 18829 of 2025 In compliance to earlier order dated 04.08.2025, the present application under Section 151 Civil Procedure Code has been filed by the appellant with prayer to place on record office order No. 3147-08/05/2025, dated 08.05.2025. Accordingly, the application is allowed and transfer order dated 08.05.2025 is taken on record. Application stands disposed of. LPA No. 453 of 2025 2. Challenge in the present Letters Patent Appeal is to the order dated 07.07.2025 passed by learned 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2025:HHC:26776 - 2 - Single Judge in CWP No.8775 of 2025, titled Dr. Anu Bala versus State of Himachal Pradesh and another, whereby, the writ petition of private respondent-Dr. Anu Bala, was allowed and the transfer order dated 22.05.2025 [Annexure P-2] inter se the appellant was quashed and set aside. Direction was given that she be allowed to rejoin at Government Ayurvedic Hospital Lambloo, District Hamipur, if relieved and the private respondent would proceed to join at the Ayurvedic Health Centre, Gwalpathar, District Hamirpur. The relevant portion reads as under: “Consequently, in view of the above, present petition is allowed and impugned transfer order dated 22.05.2025 (Annexure P-2) is quashed and set aside with a direction to the respondents to permit petitioner to rejoin at Government Ayurvedic Hospital Lambloo, Hamirpur, if relieved, as a result thereof, private respondent shall proceed to join at Ayurvedic Health Centre, Gwalpathar. Pending application(s), if any, stand disposed of” 3. Counsel for the appellant has vehemently submitted while placing reliance upon the judgment of the Apex Court in the case titled as Sri Pubi Lombi versus The State of Arunachal Pradesh & Ors, [2024] 3 S.C.R. 407, that transfer orders should not be quashed and it is only in case of malafides and violation of statutory provision, the learned Single Judge should 2025:HHC:26776 - 3 - have interfered and, therefore, the challenge is raised on that account. 4. The learned Single Judge while allowing the writ petition had noticed that the respondent-writ petitioner had been working for the last one year and eight months and had been posted at that place at her own request, as her husband was also posted there at the relevant time, as earlier she was working in District Kullu. It is in such circumstances, it has been noticed that the present appellant had managed to get himself adjusted before completion of his normal tenure. 5. Another fact which has been raised before the learned Single Judge is that the present appellant had stayed in the same district i.e. Hamirpur for more than seven years and eight months, whereas, the writ petitioner being an Ayurvedic Medical Officer had also stayed in Hamirpur district for six years, but she has also been posted in District Kullu and District Mandi, whereas, in the case of present appellant, he stayed at Hamirpur district much more in comparison to that of private respondent. In such circumstances, the writ petition has been allowed. 2025:HHC:26776 - 4 - 6. We had asked the appellant to place on record earlier transfer order dated 08.05.2025 which has been placed on record. Since the transfer order in favour of the appellant which is subject matter of challenge, dated 22.05.2025, [Annexure P-2], would go on to show that it was in partial modification of earlier transfer order dated 08.05.2025. The said order dated 08.05.2025 would go on to show that from Regional Ayurvedic Hospital Hamipur, the appellant had been transferred to Government Ayurvedic Hospital Centre, Gwalpathar, District Hamirpur, again within the same District at Hamirpur and in the said posting orders, 23 officials were involved of the Department of the Ayurvedic, Himachal Pradesh. 7. Apparently within 15 days, the said order was modified, adversely to the detriment of the private respondent herein and the writ petitioner who is a lady Officer and the present appellant replaced her. It is also not disputed that the distance between two stations is around 30 kilometers. It is thus apparent that the learned Single Judge has rightly interfered in the order of transfer, keeping in view the various factors that a 2025:HHC:26776 - 5 - posting at that place was on account of her husband who was also posted at that point of time. It is known fact that couple cases are to be given preference and, therefore, dislocation of the appellant was at the instance of the present appellant, on account of the fact that he was the only beneficiary out of 23 persons of the earlier transfer order which was modified. 8. It is thus apparent that in such circumstances, the judicial interference has been directed, keeping in view the fact that the transfer order was detrimental to the writ petitioner and therefore, the judgment which is being relied upon could not be of any assistance, as it leaves a window open where a litigant can claim that the transfer is detrimental. It is settled principle in Letters Patent Appeal that the discretion exercised by the learned Single Judge is not liable to be interfered with, on the mere asking, as such. 9. In view of above, there is no infirmity in the order passed by the learned Single Judge and would not warrant any interference at the hands of the appellant who himself is beneficiary of various transfer orders and being a male employee is trying to disturb the well settled 2025:HHC:26776 - 6 - lady employee, before her tenure had expired. 10. Accordingly, we are of the considered opinion that the order passed by learned Single Judge does not suffer from any illegality or infirmity and we do not find any plausible reason to interfere in the well reasoned order passed by the learned Single Judge. Accordingly, present appeal is dismissed. 11. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also stand disposed of. (G.S. Sandhawalia) Chief Justice (Ranjan Sharma) Judge 6th August, 2025 [himani/bhardwaj]