Sunil Kumar vs State Of Himachal Pradesh And ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 601 HP

                                                                              .
        THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA





                                                CWP No.436 of 2021
                                                Decided on: 13.01.2021





    Sunil Kumar                                                  ....Petitioner.
                      Versus
    State of Himachal Pradesh and Others    ...Respondents.





    Coram
    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge.
    Whether approved for reporting?1 No
    For the petitioner         : M/s Onkar Jairath, M.A. Safee
                         r        and Shubham Sood, Advocates.

    For the respondents:                        Mr. Ashok Sharma, Advocate General,
                                                with Mr. Ranjan Sharma,
                                                Mr. Adarsh Sharma, Mr.Vinod
                                                Thakur,    Mr.    Sanjeev   Sood,



                                                Additional Advocates General and
                                                Mr.Kunal      Thakur,      Deputy
                                                Advocate General.




    Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge (Oral)

Notice. Mr. Ranjan Sharma, Additional Advocate General

accepts notice on behalf of the respondents.

In view of the controversy involved in this petition, with

the consent of the parties, the same is being disposed of, at this stage

itself.

Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

.

2. The petitioner was appointed as a non-medical TGT and

posted as such in Government High School, Siun under Complex

Government Middle Senior Secondary School, Sangrah, Tehsil

Sangrah, District Sirmour, H.P. and he is stated to be serving there since

01.12.2014. According to the petitioner, this is a sub-cadre area and it

has been declared as such on account of its difficult terrain. The prayer

of the petitioner is that as the petitioner has already completed more

than six years service at this school which falls in sub- cadre area,

therefore, in terms of the transfer policy of the respondent-State, the

petitioner may be posted at a station which is convenient to him, within

some reasonable time.

3. Learned Additional Advocate General submits that if the

facts are as pleaded in the petition, then in the event of the petitioner

making an appropriate representation to the authority concerned

indicating therein five stations of his choice, including station in a

district which is not his home district, his representation shall be

sympathetically considered by the authority concerned keeping in view

the administrative exigency and public interest.

4. In view of the fair stand so taken by the State, this petition

is disposed of with the direction that petitioner shall file an appropriate

.

representation for his transfer from the school where he is presently

serving, within two weeks from today. As from the date of receipt of

any such representation, the same shall be decided within four weeks

after giving an opportunity to the petitioner of being heard and if

possible, the petitioner be posted at a station of his choice, obviously by

taking into consideration the administrative exigency and public interest

so involved in the posting of the petitioner. It is clarified that in case it

is not possible for the authority to immediately transfer the petitioner

from the station where he is posted, then appropriate order be passed,

ordering his transfer to a station which is likely to fall vacant in near

future. Petition stands disposed of in above terms, so also miscellaneous

applications, if any.

Copy dasti.

(Ajay Mohan Goel) Vacation Judge January 13,2021 (Rishi)