Himachal Pradesh High Court
Hamirpur vs "13. Indeed on 7 December, 2021
Bench: Tarlok Singh Chauhan, Satyen Vaidya
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA
ON THE 7th DAY OF DECEMBER, 2021
.
BEFORE
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TARLOK SINGH CHAUHAN
&
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SATYEN VAIDYA
CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 7440 OF 2021
Between:- r to
KRISHAN KUMAR S/O SH. RELU
RAM R/O VILLAGE BAJROH, OST
OFFICE BADHANI, TEHSIL
BHORANJ, DISTRICT HAMIRPUR,
HIMACHAL PRADESH
PRESENTLY WORKING AS
TRAINED GRADUATE TEACHER
(NON-MEDICAL) AT
GOVERNMENT HIGH SCHOOL
KANERAR, DISTRICT
HAMIRPUR, HIAMCHAL
PRADESH.
...PETITIONER
(BY SH. TARUN K. SHARMA, ADVOCATE)
AND
1. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH
THROUGH ITS SECRETARY
(EDUCATION) TO THE
GOVERNMENT OF HIMACHAL
PRADESH, SHIMLA, H.P.
2. THE DIRECTOR (ELEMENTARY
EDUCATION) GOVERNMENT OF
HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA,
HIMACHAL PRADESH.
3. SH. BALWANT SINGH S/O SH.
NOT KNOWN TO THE
PETITIONER, PRESENTLY
::: Downloaded on - 31/01/2022 23:23:56 :::CIS
2
WORKING AS TRAINED
GRADUATE TEACHER (NON-
MEDICAL) AT GOVERNMENT
.
HIGH SCHOOL JUBHAKHAR,
DISTRICT SOLAN, HIMACHAL
PRADESH.
...RESPONDENTS
(SH. ASHOK SHARMA, A.G.
WITH SH. RAJINDER DOGRA, SR.
ADDL. A.G., SH. VINOD
THAKUR, SH. HEMANSHU
MISRA, ADDL. A.GS. AND SH.
BHUPINDER THAKUR, DY. A.G.,
FOR RESPONDENTS NO. 1 AND
2.
This Petition coming on for orders this day, Hon'ble Mr. Justice
Tarlok Singh Chauhan, passed the following:-
ORDER
Aggrieved by the order of transfer, the petitioner has
filed the instant petition for the grant of following substantive
reliefs:-
"i) That any appropriate writ/order or direction may
kindly be issued and the impugned transfer orders
dated 24.11.2021 at Annexure P-1 may kindly be
quashed.
ii) That any appropriate writ/order or direction in the
nature of mandamus may kindly be issued and the
respondents may be directed to permit the petitioner
to serve as Trained Graduate Teacher (Non-Medical)
at Government High School Kanerar, District
Hamirpur, Himachal Pradesh.
2. Record reveals that the transfer of the petitioner, no
doubt, has been effected on the basis of a D.O. Note No. 340908,
.
dated 17.11.2021, but then it is the petitioner himself who at an
earlier occasion himself pulled political strings by procuring D.O.
Note while seeking his transfer at the current station i.e.
Government High School, Kanerar, District Hamirpur. Therefore,
in such circumstances, he is not entitled to any relief in terms of
the repeated judgments rendered by this Court.
3. Reference in this regard can conveniently be made to
the judgment rendered by this Court in CWP No. 1387 of 2021,
titled as Parveen Kumar vs. State of H. P. and Ors.,
decided on 31.03.2021, wherein it was observed as under:-
"13. Indeed, transfer is an incidence of service and
government employees are supposed to be transferred
and posted anywhere in the State . The transfers of the
petitioner and that of respondent No. 4 are effected after
the approval of the competent authority. The petitioner,
earlier managed his posting at GSSS Nabahi, Mandi, and
now he has been transferred from Nabahi, after
completion of his normal tenure, so he has no right to say
that transfer of respondent No. 4, effected on the basis of
D.O. Note, is illegal and bad in the eyes of law. In fact,
transfer of the petitioner has no tinge of malafides,
neither without public interest nor vitiated, being against
the settled Transfer Policy, as transfer is an incidence of
service. Moreover in Sanjeev Sood vs. State of Himachal
Pradesh and others, CWP No. 4208 of 2020, decided on
22.12.2020, this Court has held as under:
"9. This Court in CWP No. 4063 of 2019, titled Smt.
Anita Rana and Anr vs. State of Himachal Pradesh and
.
others, decided on 31.12.2019, has specifically held
that a recipient /beneficiary of DO note cannot
approach this Court ventilating the grievance that he
/she has been transferred on the basis of DO Note. It
would be apposite to refer to the relevant observations
made by a Coordinate Bench in order dated
31.12.2019, which reads as under:-
"We have heard this matter for some time and also
perused the record produced by the office of
respondent No. 2. It is seen from the record that on
rthe D.O. Note, the transfer of petitioner No. 1 has
been proposed to be cancelled. Meaning thereby that
she is also recipient of D.O. Note, hence not justified
in ventilating the grievances that she has been
transferred on the basis of D.O. note. Therefore, the
writ petition qua her deserves to be dismissed and is
accordingly dismissed leaving it open to her to make
a representation either for cancellation of her
transfer or adjustment at some suitable place, if so
advised."
10. Since it is apparent that the petitioner, on earlier
occasions, got himself posted at stations of choice on
the basis of UO Notes, petition praying therein for
quashment of impugned order is not maintainable at
all. However, having taken note of the fact that both,
petitioner and respondent No.3, have been repeatedly
exerting political pressure to get themselves posted at
stations of their choice, we dispose of this petition by
directing respondents to transfer both, petitioner and
respondent No.3, to some other places in the State,
especially where both of them have not served till date,
within two weeks."
.
4. In view of the aforesaid discussion, we do not find
any merit in this petition and the same is accordingly dismissed.
Pending applications, if any, also stands disposed of.
(Tarlok Singh Chauhan)
Judge
(Satyen Vaidya)
th
7 December, 2021 Judge
(sanjeev)
