Himachal Pradesh High Court
Naveen Chaudhary vs State Of H.P. And Others on 4 August, 2021
Bench: Ravi Malimath, Justice, Jyotsna Rewal Dua
1
HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
C.W.P. No. 3878 of 2021
Date of decision: 04.08.2021
.
Naveen Chaudhary ...Petitioner
Versus
State of H.P. and others ...Respondents
____________________________________________________
Coram:
The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ravi Malimath, Acting Chief Justice
Whether approved for reporting1 :
r to
The Hon'ble Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge
For the Petitioner(s): Mr. Sudhanshu Jamwal, Advocate.
For the Respondents: Mr. Ashok Sharma, Advocate General,
with Mr. Ranjan Sharma, Mr. Vikas
Rathore Ms.Ritta Goswami, Additional
Advocates General and Ms. Seema
Sharma, Deputy Advocate General, for
respondents No. 1 to 3.
Mr. Naresh Kaul, Advocate, for
respondent No. 4.
Through Video Conference
____________________________________________________
Jyotsna Rewal Dua,J.
Petitioner and respondent No. 4 are serving as
Lecturers (School Cadre). They both want to remain at place
Whether Reporters of local newspaper are permitted to see the judgment ?
Sakoh in district Kangra, H.P. Hence, the litigation in respect to a
transfer order.
2. The petitioner was serving at Dari in district Kangra
.
since 2018. On 08.07.2021, he was transferred from GSSS Dari,
District Kangra to GSSS Kosri, District Kangra, H.P. The
petitioner did not join at the transferred station. Vide order dated
12.07.2021, he was adjusted on his request at Sakoh (Kangra).
Respondent No. 4, who was serving at Sakoh (Kangra), was
ordered to be shifted to Kosri (Kangra) to make way for the
petitioner. Before the implementation of the transfer order, dated
12.07.2021, the respondent-State withdrew and cancelled this
order on 14.07.2021.
3. The petitioner is aggrieved against cancellation of his
transfer to Sakoh. He wants to serve at Sakoh. Learned counsel
for the petitioner submits that respondent No. 4 has already
completed her normal tenure at Sakoh and, therefore, is liable to
be shifted from Sakoh. Countering this, learned counsel for
respondent No.4 submitted that husband of respondent No. 4 is
serving in the Ministry of Home Affairs in Intelligence Bureau as
Central Intelligence Officer and as his wife-respondent No. 4 is
entitled for the concession granted to the wives of soldiers in
following Clause 5.2 of the Transfer Policy :-
"Concession to the wives of soldiers :- The wives of
officers/officials of Military/Central Para-Military forces will,
as far as possible, be posted appointed at convenient
places, subject to availability of vacancy."
.
. Learned Additional Advocate General submitted that
the petitioner has served within a distance of only 5 k.m. ever
since the year 2015 and that, distance between Dari and Sakoh is
around 5 k.m. .
4. The petitioner belongs to State cadre and in that
capacity can be posted anywhere in the State. Learned counsel
for the petitioner has not disputed the fact that he has served
within a distance of only 5 k.m. for the past about five years. In
such a situation, petitioner's transfer from Dari (District Kangra) to
Kosri (District Kangra) does not call for any interference. This
petition is accordingly dismissed along with pending applications,
if any.
( Ravi Malimath )
Acting Chief Justice
4th August, 2021 (K) ( Jyotsna Rewal Dua )
Judge
