Village Harlot vs Union Of India And Another (1993) 1 ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 5561 HP

       IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA
                  ON THE 3rd DAY OF DECEMBER, 2021
                                  BEFORE




                                                                    .
            HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TARLOK SINGH CHAUHAN





                                      &
                 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SATYEN VAIDYA





                 CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 6362 OF 2021
     Between:-

     PANKAJ KUMAR
     S/O SH. RAMESH CHAND





     VILLAGE HARLOT, P.O. BASANTPUR
     TEHSIL SARKAGHAT DISTT MANDI, H.P.
     PRESENTLY UNDER TRANSFER FROM
     GSSS KUH MANJHWAR TO GSSS KHANI
     MANDI, H.P.
                         r                                       ....PETITIONER

     (BY SH. VISHWA BHUSHAN, ADVOCATE)

      AND

1.    THE STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH



      THROUGH PRINCIPAL SECRETARY (EDUCATION)
      TO THE GOVERNMENT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH
      SHIMLA-2.




2.    THE DIRECTOR OF HIGHER EDUCATION,
      HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA-1.





3.    SUNEEL KUMAR LECTURER (SCHOOL NEW)
      ENGLISH S/O SH. NOT TO THE PETITIONER
      WORKING AS LECTURER AT GSSS KUH





      MANJHWAR DISTT. BILASPUR, H.P.
                                                              ..RESPONDENTS

     (MR. ASHOK SHARMA, A.G. MR.
     RAJINDER DOGRA, SR. ADDL. A.G.,
     MR. VINOD THAKUR, MR. SHIV PAL
     MANHANS, MR. HEMANSHU MISHRA,
     ADDL. A.Gs AND MR. BHUPINDER
     THAKUR, DY. A.G FOR R-1 & R-2 AND
     MR.     DEVENDER        K.     SHARMA,
     ADVOCATE FOR R-3)
     ________________________________________________________________________

            This petition coming on for orders this day, Hon'ble Mr.

      Justice Tarlok Singh Chauhan, passed the following:




                                                   ::: Downloaded on - 31/01/2022 23:22:49 :::CIS
                                     2




                                ORDER

Aggrieved by the order of transfer, the petitioner has filed the

.

instant petition for the grant of following substantive relief:-

"(i) That the order dated 2-9-2021 (Annexure-P/1) issued by the respondent No. 2, being unconstitutional,

discriminatory, arbitrary, unreasonable, unjustified and contrary to the transfer policy, may kindly be quashed and the respondents may please be directed to adjust the petitioner at GSSS Mundkhar Hamirpur."

2.

Records reveal that even though the recommendation of

transfer of private respondent was at the behest of local MLA,

however, the same was dealt with administratively and only

thereafter it was approved by the competent authority.

3. In such circumstances, we see no reason to interfere with the

order of transfer and the same is accordingly upheld.

4. However, at this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner

states that his family circumstances do not warrant his transfer.

This is a matter which is required to be considered by the employer-

Department, in terms of judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in

Rajendra Roy vs. Union of India and another (1993) 1 SCC

148, wherein its was observed as under:-

"7.......The appellant has not made any representation about personal hardship to th department. As such, there was no occasion for the department to consider such representation. This appeal, therefore, fails and is dismissed, but we make no order as to costs. It is, however, made clear that the appellant will be free to make representation to the concerned department about personal hardship, if any, being suffered by the appellant in view of the impugned order. It is reasonable

expected that if such representation is made, the same should be considered by the department as expeditiously as practicable."

.

6. Accordingly, while dismissing the instant petition, we direct

the official respondents to consider the family circumstances set out

in this petition and if possible, accommodate the petitioner at one of

the stations of his choice. However, we make it clear that this order

shall not be treated as a precedent in future, as the same is being

passed in the peculiar facts and circumstances of this case.

7. The writ petition is disposed of in the aforesaid terms, so also

the pending application(s), if any.

                                                     (Tarlok Singh Chauhan)
                                                               Judge


    December 03, 2021                                   ( Satyen Vaidya )


           (naveen)                                           Judge