At Indira Gandhi Medical College vs Union Of India And Anr. (1993) 1 Scc ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 5852 HP

         IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA

                ON THE 22nd DAY OF DECEMBER, 2021




                                                         .

                             BEFORE

            HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TARLOK SINGH CHAUHAN





                                &

         HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDER BHUSAN BAROWALIA





               CIVIL WRIT PETITION No.8109 of 2021.

         Between:- r
         MS. POONAM DEVI D/O LATE

         SH. RAVI KUMAR (PMIS NO-26632)
         R/O VILLAGE TALKEHAR AND POST
         OFFICE AHJU, TEHSIL JOGINDER
         NAGAR, DISTRICT MANDI (H.P.),
         PRESENTLY WORKING AS STAFF NURSE



         AT INDIRA GANDHI MEDICAL COLLEGE
         SHIMLA (H.P.).
                                                    ......PETITIONER.




         (BY SH. ONKAR JAIRATH AND





         SH. PANKAJ THAKUR, ADVOCATES)

         AND





    1.   STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH THROUGH
         ITS ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECRETARY (HEALTH)
         TO THE GOVT. OF H.P., SHIMLA (HP).

    2.   THE DIRECTOR HEALTH SERVICES,
         HIMACHAL PRADESH SDA COMPLEX,
         SHIMLA-171009.



                                                    ......RESPONDENTS.




                                        ::: Downloaded on - 31/01/2022 23:28:40 :::CIS
                                       2




          ( BY SH. AJAY VAIDYA, SENIOR ADDITIONAL
          ADVOCATE GENERAL)




                                                                  .

                This petition coming on for orders this day, Hon'ble
    Mr. Justice Tarlok Singh Chauhan, passed the following:





                           ORDER

Notice. Mr. Ajay Vaidya, learned Senior Additional

Advocate General, appears and waives service of notice on

behalf of the respondents.

2. The instant petition has been filed for grant of the

following substantive relief:-

"That Your Lordships may further graciously be

pleased to issue the Writ in the nature of Mandamus directing the respondents to transfer and adjust the

Petitioner at any of the vacant stations as mentioned in Para 5 in the preceding Paras of the Writ Petition

after giving due and sympathetical consideration to the adverse family circumstances of the Petitioner as

has been done with other similarly situated incumbents."

3. A perusal of the petition would go to reveal that

save and except an individual hardship, no other ground has

been set out in this petition for claiming the relief.

4. This is a matter which is required to be considered

by the Employer.

.

5. It is more than settled that the Courts are

extremely slow in directly interfering in the personal hardship

cases. The clear implication of the almost consistent directions

given in the cases is that the transferee could make a

representation to the competent authority.

6. Reference in this regard can conveniently be

made to the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in

Rajendra Roy vs Union Of India and anr. (1993) 1 SCC 148.

7. Accordingly, without going into the merits of the

case, we deem it proper to dispose of the instant petition by

directing respondent No.2 to consider and decide the

representation made by the petitioner on 27.04.2021

(Annexure P-3) within a period of three weeks from today.

Ordered accordingly.

8. However, it is made clear that this order has been

passed in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the instant

case and shall not be treated as precedent in future.

9. Pending application, if any, also stands disposed

of.

.

Copy 'dasti'.

(Tarlok Singh Chauhan)

Judge

(Chander Bhusan Barowalia)

Judge 22nd December, 2021.

    (krt)         r