As Tgt(Non-Medical) In Govt. ... vs Union Of India And Anr. (1993) 1 Scc ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 4884 HP

    IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA
              ON THE 04TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2021
                           BEFORE
         HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TARLOK SINGH CHAUHAN




                                                    .
                               &





             HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SATYEN VAIDYA

              CIVIL WRIT PETITION No. 6308 of 2021





      Between:-





      AJAY KUMAR,
      S/o LATE SH. D.C. KALRA,
      RESIDENT OF VILLAGE AND P.O.
      SIDHWARI, TAPOVAN ROAD, DHARAMSHALA,

      DISTRICT KANGRA, H.P. PRESENTLY WORKING

      AS TGT(NON-MEDICAL) IN GOVT. MIDDLE
      KARYACHI U/C GOVT. SR. SEC. SCHOOL TUTU
      SHIMLA, H.P.
                                          ......PETITIONER



      (BY MS. ANJALI SONI VERMA, ADVOCATE)

      AND




    1. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH,





       THROUGH PRINCIPAL SECRETARY
       (EDUCATION) TO THE GOVERNMENT OF
       HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA 171 002.





    2. DIECTOR, ELEMENTARY EDUCATION HIMACHAL
       PRADESH SHIMLA 171 001.


                                            ......RESPONDENTS

      (MR. RAJENDER DOGRA, SR. ADDITIONAL ADVOCATE
      GENERAL, WITH MR. SHIV PAL MANHANS, MR.
      HEMANSHU    MISRA,  ADDL.     A.GS., AND MR.
      BHUPINDER THAKUR, DY. A.G., FOR THE




                                   ::: Downloaded on - 31/01/2022 23:10:03 :::CIS
                                             -2-


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

.

The instant petition has been filed for the grant of

following substantive relief:-

i) That the respondents may kindly be directed to adjust/transfer the petitioner near to his home station keeping in view of his ill health

and his adverse family circumstances, against vacancy or against longer stay by issuing a writ of mandamus.

2. The perusal of the pleadings would go to show that

there is no ground whatsoever seeking transfer save and except

adverse health circumstances of the petitioner. However, it is more

than settled that this is a matter which is required to be considered by

the employer and 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.

3. Accordingly, without going into the merit of the case and

without treating it as a precedent, the respondents are directed to

consider the present petition as representation sympathetically within

a period of two weeks. Till such decision is taken by the respondents,

no coercive steps shall be taken so as to compel him to join at the

transferred station.

Copy dasti.

(Tarlok Singh Chauhan)

.

Judge

(Satyen Vaidya) Judge October 04, 2021 (tarun/sushma)

r to