IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA CWP No.14774 of 2024 Decided on: 28th February 2025 _________________________________________________________________ Kamal Mohan ....Petitioner Versus State of H.P. & Ors. …Respondents _________________________________________________________________ Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua 1 Whether approved for reporting? _________________________________________________________________ For the petitioner: Mr. Devender K. Sharma, Advocate. For the respondents: Ms. Menka Raj Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General. Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge In question is office order dated 03.12.2024 that transfers the petitioner, a Male Health Supervisor, from Civil Hospital (CH) Joginder Nagar, District Mandi to Civil Hospital Ladbharol, District Mandi, H.P. 2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and considered the case file as well as the record produced by the respondents-State. 3. Petitioner was appointed as Multiple Health Worker (Class-IV), District Cadre, on 19.06.2002 in District 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? yes - 2 - Mandi, H.P. From the date of his initial appointment till 09.11.2023, petitioner served at different Health Sub Centers in Block Ladbhrol, District Mandi. His incumbency position, as made available by the learned Deputy Advocate General, is as under:- “As MHW:- HSC, Sainthal (under Block Ladbharol) 19.06.2002 to 01.06.2006 HSC Dohag (under Block Ladbharol) 02.06.2006 to 07.02.2013 HSC Sainthal (under Block Ladbharol) 08.02.2013 to 08.06.2015 HSC Golwan (under Block Ladbharol) 21.07.2015 to 01.10.2022 HSC Tramat (under Block Ladbharol) 02.10.2022 to 09.11.2023 As MHS:- CH Dharampur 10.11.2023 to 19.02.2024 CH Joginder Nagar 20/02/2024 to contd.” 4. Petitioner was promoted as Male Health Supervisor on 31.10.2023. He was posted as such at CH Dharampur on 10.11.2023. Vide impugned office order dated 03.12.2024, petitioner was transferred to CH Ladbhrol, District Mandi. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the impugned transfer order has been issued on the basis of a DO note without allowing the petitioner to complete his normal tenure at CH Joginder Nagar, District Mandi. On the basis of this contention, operation of the impugned transfer - 3 - order was stayed vide order dated 06.12.2024 passed in this writ petition. Consequently, petitioner is continuing to serve at CH Joginder Nagar, district Mandi. 6. Respondents in their reply have canvassed that the petitioner’s transfer to CH Joginder Nagar was on the basis of a DO note, therefore, petitioner cannot be heard to complain that the impugned order, transferring him to CH Ladbharol, District Mandi, was also issued on the basis of a DO note. Learned counsel for the petitioner now states that petitioner had made a request to transfer him at CH Joginder Nagar in view of his seriously ill mother. Learned Deputy Advocate General, however, fairly submits from the record that the petitioner’s transfer to CH Joginder Nagar and his impugned transfer to CH Ladbharol, District Mandi are on the basis of DO notes. 7. In view of the settled legal position, since the impugned transfer order has been issued on the basis of a DO note and taking stock of the factual position as well as the record produced by the respondents, the impugned transfer order is quashed and set aside. However, at the same time, taking note of the fact that the petitioner’s - 4 - transfer to CH Joginder Nagar was also on the basis of a DO note, respondents are permitted and are at liberty to consider the case of the petitioner for transfer afresh in accordance with law. The writ petition stands disposed of in the above terms, so also the pending miscellaneous application(s), if any. Jyotsna Rewal Dua Judge February 28, 2025 R.Atal