IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.16183 of 2025 Date of Decision: 15.10.2025 ____________________________________________________________ Rakesh Sharma …….Petitioner Versus State of H.P. and Another ….Respondents ____________________________________________________________ Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? 1 For the Petitioner: Ms. Shivangi Sharma, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Rajan Kahol & Mr. Vishal Panwar, Additional Advocates General, with Mr. Ravi Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General, for State. ____________________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, Judge (oral): Petitioner herein, who at present is working as TGT (Non- Medical) at GSSS (Boys) at Una, has approached this Court in the instant proceedings seeking directions to respondents to consider and decide his pending representation (Annexure P-4), whereby he has prayed for his transfer from present place of posting to one of the station of his choice, as detailed in the representation, on the ground of couple case. 2. Having regard to the nature of prayer made in the instant petition and order proposed to be passed, this Court sees no necessity to call for the reply on behalf of the respondents, who are otherwise represented by Mr. Rajan Kahol, learned Additional Advocate General. Mr. Kahol states that since petitioner has not completed normal tenure of posting at present place of posting, he is not entitled to seek transfer. 3. True it is that petitioner has not completed normal tenure of posting at present place of posting, but once Clause 5.4 of the Transfer 1Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 Policy, formulated by the Government of Himachal Pradesh, enables an employee to seek transfer/adjustment on the ground of couple case, this Court sees no impediment in issuing directions to respondents to consider and decide the pending representation of the petitioner in time bound manner. 4. Consequently, in view of the above, this Court, without going into the merits of the case, deems it fit to dispose of the present petition, with the direction to respondents to consider and decide the pending representation of the petitioner expeditiously, preferably, within a period of four weeks. Ordered accordingly. 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 thereupon taking note of the fact that wife of the petitioner is also Government employee and at present, she is working as JBT at GPS Sai, BEEO Hamirpur. Pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed of. (Sandeep Sharma), Judge October 15, 2025 (Rajeev Raturi)