SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2023 Supreme(HP) 352

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA
TARLOK SINGH CHAUHAN, SATYEN VAIDYA, JJ.
Rishi Pal Sharma – Petitioner
Versus
State of H.P. and Others – Respondents
CWP No. 890 of 2023
Decided On : 28-06-2023

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner: K.B. Khajuria.
For the Respondents: Anup Rattan, Ramakant Sharma, Sharmila Patial, Priyanka Chauhan, Sanjeev Bhushan, Rakesh Chauhan, Virender Thakur.

Point of Law: Member of Legislative Assembly or Ministers concerned, have right to make recommendations but these recommendations cannot be taken to be final word.

Headnote:

Order of transfer - Transfer is in violation of norms - Petitioner has assailed notification whereby petitioner has been ordered to be transferred from DIET Nahan (SMR) to GSSS Jaihar (SMR) and respondent No. 3 has been ordered to be transferred from GSSS Dadahu (SMR) to DIET Nahan vice petitioner - As per norms transfer has not been one of suggested modes for filling posts in DIET.

Findings of the Court:

Petitioner has contended that his transfer is in violation of norms adopted by Government for employees of DIET - Petitioner could not have been transferred before completion of fixed tenure of five years - Since petitioner was posted in DIET Nahan in November, 2019, he had not completed his tenure and on this ground also, his transfer is vitiated - No selection process was undertaken and in such view of matter, petitioner cannot be allowed to take benefit of only that norm which suits him by ignoring all other aspects - Notification Annexure P-4, has been held to be unsustainable as regards transfer of respondent No. 3, same will apply to petitioner also, who himself has not only been recipient of D.O. - Impugned notification Annexure P-4, is quashed and set-aside.

Result: Petition disposed of.

JUDGMENT :

SATYEN VAIDYA, J.

1. By way of instant petition, petitioner has assailed notification dated 28.02.2023, Annexure P-4, whereby the petitioner has been ordered to be transferred from DIET Nahan (SMR) to GSSS Jaihar (SMR) and respondent No. 3 has been ordered to be transferred from GSSS Dadahu (SMR) to DIET Nahan vice petitioner.

2. Petitioner has taken exception to the impugned transfer notification on the ground that the same is neither for any administrative exigency nor in public interest, rather has been effected only to accommodate respondent No. 3 at the instance of local MLA (respondent No. 4). It is also the case of petitioner that his transfer is in violation of the norms fixed by the Government of Himachal Pradesh for the personnel serving DIET, which prescribes minimum five years tenure for the principal. Petitioner has also levelled allegations of bias against respondent number 4.

3. The official respondents have contested the prayer of the petitioner on the ground that the petitioner is holding Class-I (Gazetted) State cadre post and is liable to be posted anywhere in the State on administrative requirement. As per respondents No. 1 and 2, since the pay, seniority, status and scale of the petitioner has not been affected in any manner, therefore, he cannot have any grievance against the notification dated 28.02.2023. It is further submitted that the guidelines formulated by the State Government cannot have the consequence of depriving or denying the right of competent authority to transfer an employee in public interest or in exigency of service.

4. Reply has also been filed on behalf of respondent No. 4. It is submitted that respondent No. 3 is one of the constituents of the Assembly Constituency represented by respondent No. 4. He had made a request for his posting at Nahan on account of old age and ailment of his mother and the hardships faced by his family. Respondent No. 4 had recommended the transfer of respondent No. 3 to Nahan on this score alone. The allegations of respondent No. 4 having any grievance or ill-will against petitioner have been denied in entirety.

5. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have also gone through the records of the case carefully.

6. The official respondents have placed on record copy of D.O. Note issued by respondent No. 4 recommending the transfer of petitioner and respondent No. 3 and also the U.O. Note issued by the office of Hon’ble Chief Minister of Himachal Pradesh, approving such recommendation. It is clearly made out from the contents of the D.O. note issued by respondent No. 4 that he had made specific recommendation to transfer respondent No. 3 to DIET, Nahan vice the petitioner, whose transfer was further recommended to GSSS Jaihar or GSSS Bongil-Khech in District Sirmaur. The D.O. note as such was approved by the office of Hon’ble Chief Minister. It is no where revealed from the records that the recommendation made by respondent No. 4 was dealt with by the Administrative Department by applying independent mind.

7. The above modus operandi used for transfer of employees of the State Government has met with strong disapproval of this Court more than once. It will be gainful to recapitulate some of such instances. In CWP No. 8590 of 2014, titled Raj Kumar vs. State of H.P. and Others, decided on 31.12.2014, a co-ordinate bench of this Court taking note of a number of precedents has held as under:

    “10. This precise question came up for consideration before this court more than three and half decades back in Ram Krishan vs. District Education Officer, ILR (Himachal Series) (1979) 8 HIM 481, wherein this court held as follows:

“8. We hereby record our strong disapproval of such type of interference from outsiders in day today administration of the State. If such interference is to be allowed, it would only mean that the government servants should run after those who are taking part in public life and in politics for getting better terms of service and a bette

    Click Here to Read the rest of this document
    1
    2
    3
    4
    5
    6
    7
    8
    9
    10
    11
    SupremeToday Portrait Ad
    supreme today icon
    logo-black

    An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

    Please visit our Training & Support
    Center or Contact Us for assistance

    qr

    Scan Me!

    India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

    For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

    whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
    whatsapp-icon Back to top