CWP-19538-2018 (O&M)

1

228-1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH

CWP-19538-2018 (O&M)

Date of decision : 15.07.2019

Krishan Kumar

... Petitioner(s)

Versus

State of Haryana and others

... Respondent(s)

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL

Present:

Mr. S.K. Nehra, Advocate

for the petitioner.

Mr. Harish Nain, AAG, Haryana.

****

AMIT RAWAL, J. (ORAL)

The short point involved in the present writ petition is whether

the petitioner, who is suffering from locomotive disability, as per medical

certificate (Annexure P-2), can be transferred with a common order.

The petitioner is stated to have appointed as Primary Teacher

(PRT/JBT), in pursuance to advertisement No.2 of 2012.

Mr. Nehra, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the

petitioner submitted that the selection, aforementioned, is already subject

matter of adjudication in the LPA Nos.720 of 2016 and 686 of 2016 and

various others, wherein, vide order dated 20.04.2017, 54 posts of JBT were

ordered to be kept vacant so as to accommodate the appellant-writ

petitioners, but later on, the aforementioned order was modified, vide order

dated 08.05.2017, whereby the State is directed to identify the total number

of posts, as per original merit list or revised list or in terms of the directions

YOGESH SHARMA

2019.07.23 10:26

I attest to the accuracy and

integrity of this document

CWP-19538-2018 (O&M)

2

issued by learned Single Judge(s) and as an interim measure, offer

appointments strictly in order of merit as per the revised merit list. The

respondent(s), vide Annexure P-7), instead of considering the petitioner as a

permanent employee, treated him on Ad hoc basis, whereas it should have

been interim arrangement in view of order of this Court. The petitioner was

earlier allocated District Yamuna Nagar, but on a request of allocation

of home District i.e. Hisar, as per policy of the Government, vide order

dated 13.03.2018 (Annexure P-7), was allocated District Hisar.

Intriguingly, the Director Elementary Education, Haryana/respondent No.2,

vide Annexures P-9 and P-10, communicated to all District Elementary

Education Officers, for cancellation of transfer/adjustment orders of Guest

Teachers, including all Ad hoc JBT Guest Teachers, though in merit, who

have come in the revised list i.e. as per order dated 08.05.2017 of this Court.

Though, the petitioner is only confining the relief with regard to the transfer

as expression 'Ad hoc' cannot be construed to be correct, once the petitioner

has joined the services through regular process.

Mr. Harish Nain, AAG, Haryana, has drawn the attention of

this Court to the written statement, wherein it has been mentioned that the

petitioner is allowed to continue in District Hisar, till regular employee

joins.

In rebuttal, Mr. Nehra submitted that word 'regular employee'

cannot be construed to be correct as the petitioner cannot be treated as Ad

hoc employee. It would have been tentative list, subject to the outcome of

LPA, even this fact could not be disputed by the State Counsel.

Be that as it may, policy dated 07.04.1989 (Annexure P-11),

has laid down the parameters that as far as possible, the handicapped and

YOGESH SHARMA

2019.07.23 10:26

I attest to the accuracy and

integrity of this document

CWP-19538-2018 (O&M)

3

the blind employees be shown due consideration to mitigate their

inconvenience while considering the question of their postings and

transfers. The aforementioned policy has already been upheld by the

Division Bench of this Court in CWP No.9773 of 1994 titled as “Kulwant

Kaur V/s State of Punjab, decided on 01.11.1994.

In view of the stand taken by the State, the grievance of the

petitioner viz-a-viz the transfer stands vindicated.

With the aforesaid observations, the present writ petition stands

disposed of as having been rendered infructuous.

15.07.2019

Yogesh Sharma

( AMIT RAWAL )

JUDGE

Whether speaking/reasoned

Yes/ No

Whether Reporta