Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR AT JAMMU
Janak Raj Kotwal, J.
Dalip Kumar - Petitioner
Vs.
State of J&K and others - Respondents
SWP No. 1847 of 2017, MP No. 01 of 2017
Decided On : 26-07-2017
Transfer Policy - Government Employee Transfer - The court admitted the writ petition and directed the petitioner to make a detailed representation, supported with documents, to the Administrative Secretary for consideration and a decision, in accordance with the Transfer Policy.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, an incharge ZEO, challenged his transfer from one education zone to another, citing retirement within a short period and the need to care for his specially abled son.
Finding of the Court:
The court admitted the writ petition and directed the petitioner to make a detailed representation to the Administrative Secretary for consideration and a decision, while allowing the petitioner to continue in his current position until a decision is made.
Issues: Challenge of transfer based on retirement and care for specially abled son, application of Transfer Policy, and relief sought through writ petition.
Ratio Decidendi: The court considered the Transfer Policy, which provided for officials with specially abled children to be posted near their place of residence and officials nearing retirement to be preferably posted close to where they intend to settle after retirement.
Final Decision: The court directed the petitioner to make a detailed representation to the Administrative Secretary and allowed the petitioner to continue in his current position until a decision is made on the representation.
Notice.
2. Mr. Ravinder Gupta, AAG waives notice on behalf of the respondents.
3. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
4. Transfer of the petitioner, an incharge ZEO, from Education Zone, Bishnah, District, Jammu to Education Zone, Sallan, Kathua is challenged on twin grounds, firstly, that the petitioner is retiring from Government service within the period of less than one and half years, exactly on 30.08.2018 and secondly, that petitioner has to look after his specially abled son, which is evident from the annexure-C. It is, however, admitted that the impugned transfer order dated 29.06.2017 has been implemented on 22.07.2017 when the petitioner has been relieved from his present place of posting.
5. Clause 11 of the Transfer Policy issued by the Government vide No. 622-Edu of 2015 dated 22.12.2015 provides that subject to the availability of post, officials with specially abled children would be posted at a place near to their place of residence and Clause 12 provides that the officials attaining age of superannuation within one year, shall be preferably posted at a place close to where they intend to settle down after retirement.
6. Petitioner’s grievance deserves consideration in light of the aforementioned provisions of the Transfer Policy.
7. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and with the consensus of both the sides, this writ petition is admitted to hearing and disposed of by providing that petitioner shall make a detailed representation, supported with documents, to the Administrative Secretary, herein respondent No. 1, who shall accord consideration thereto and take appropriate decision, preferably within two weeks after petitioner produces a copy of this order along with a copy of the representation with supporting documents in the office of respondent No. 1, which be done within four days hereafter.
8. Till a decision on the representation is taken, petitioner shall report to the Director, School Education, Jammu, herein respondent No. 2 and shall be allowed to continue there Disposed of.
AI
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
