IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.16337 of 2025 Date of Decision: 16.10.2025 _______________________________________________________ Anil Kumar …….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: Mr. Sohail Khan, proxy counsel vice Ms. Vikas Rajput, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Rajan Kahol and Mr. Vishal Panwar, Additional Advocate Generals, with Mr. Ravi Chauhan and Mr. Anish Banshtu, Deputy Advocate Generals _______________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, Judge (oral): Petitioner herein, who at present is working as TGT (Non- Medical) at Government Middle School Birwari u/c Government Senior Secondary School, Diur, District Chamba, Himachal Pradesh, has approached this Court in the instant proceedings seeking directions to respondents to consider and decide his pending representation (Annexure P-2), 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 1Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 otherwise represented by Mr. Rajan Kahol, learned Additional Advocate General. Mr. Kahol fairly states that representation, if not already decided, shall be decided expeditiously. 3. True it is that petitioner has completed normal tenure of posting at present place of posting, but once Clause 5.4 of the Transfer 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(Annexure P-2) 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 TGT (Arts) at Government High School Jarot, u/c Government Senior Secondary School Amlela, District Kangra, Himachal Pradesh. 3 Pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed of. (Sandeep Sharma), Judge October16, 2025 (shankar)