Advocates:
['SURESH CHANDRA BHATT', '', 'SANJAY KUMAR JOSHI', 'C S C']

HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL

Writ Petition (S/S) No. 1141 of 2021

Puspesh Sanga

…....... Petitioner

Vs.

Director Secondary Education Uttarakhand Dehradun and others

……...... Respondents

Mr. S.C. Bhatt, Advocate for the petitioner.

Ms.

Anjali

Bhargawa,

Additional

Chief

Standing

Counsel

for

the

State/respondents.

JUDGMENT

Hon’ble Ravindra Maithani, J. (Oral)

In the instant writ petition, petitioner has impugned order

dated 27.03.2017, passed by respondent no.2, by which, petitioner has

been transferred from Government Inter College, Banbhoolpura,

Nainital to Government Inter College, Bhaursa, Bhimtal, District

Nainital.

2.

It is the case of the petitioner that earlier he was posted in

Government Inter College, Banbhoolpura, Haldwani, District Nainital

till 2017. In that school there was one post of In-charge National Cadet

Corps. But, due to collusion between a teacher and Principal, the name

of the petitioner was not forwarded. Petitioner had to file WPSS

No.355 of 2016 (for short, “first writ petition”) for that purpose. In that,

certain orders were passed, pursuant to which petitioner was permitted

to participate in the process of appointment of In-charge National Cadet

Corps. But, the result is yet in a sealed envelope and the writ petition is

still pending. Subsequent to it, the petitioner was attached with the

office of the Chief Education Officer, Nainital by an order dated

11.07.2016, which was challenged by the petitioner in WPSS No.1419

of 2016 (for short, “second writ petition”), which is still pending.

2

3.

During the pendency of the second writ petition, it is the

case of the petitioner that he was again attached with Government Inter

College, Kyari, Nainital and subsequently from there to Government

Inter College Bhaursa, Bhimtal, District Nainital, by order dated

27.03.2017, which is impugned in this writ petition.

4.

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the

record.

5.

Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that

earlier petitioner filed two writ petitions, one for consideration of his

name for the post of In-charge National Cadet Corps in the

Government Inter College, Banbhoolpura, Haldwani, District Nainital,

which is still pending. Thereafter, when on 11.07.2016, petitioner was

attached with the office of the Chief Education Officer, Nainital, he

preferred second writ petition, which is still pending.

6.

It is argued that during the pendency of the second writ

petition, the petitioner was once attached to Government Inter College,

Kyari, Ramnagar, District Nainital, by way of an order dated

19.08.2016 and subsequently, by the impugned order, he has been

transferred to the Government Inter College, Bhaursa, Bhimtal,

Nainital. It is argued that during the pendency of the second writ

petition, this should not have been done by the authority concerned.

Learned counsel would submit that between the year 2016 and 2017,

petitioner was transferred thrice. He has been harassed for no reason.

7.

Learned State counsel would submit that the petition has

been filed after four years. Petitioner is already working in the school

pursuant to the impugned order.

8.

Why is the impugned order bad in the eyes of law?

Merely, because three transfers have been made. It cannot be said, bad

in the eyes of law. Is it malafide action? Petitioner has to show

something. But, nothing has been revealed in the petition or during the

course of arguments. The first order dated 11.07.2016, by which, the

3

petitioner was attached with the office of the Chief Education Officer,

Naintial, was challenged by the petitioner in WPSS No.1419 of 2016. It

is submitted that no interim order was passed in that petition. It is still

pending. If respondents have committed any irregularity or

impropriety, for attaching or transfer during the pe