Citation : 2022 Latest Caselaw 9107 HP
Judgement Date : 7 November, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA
ON THE 7th DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2022
.
BEFORE
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TARLOK SINGH CHAUHAN
&
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIRENDER SINGH
CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 7787 OF 2022
Between:-
BRIJ PANKAJ
DIKSHIT
SMT. RITU SHARMA W/O SH.
VPO
PADDAR, TEHSIL
DHARAMSHALA, DISTT.
KANGRA H.P.
....PETITIONER
(BY SH. TARUN SHARMA,
ADVOCATE)
AND
1. STATE OF H.P. THROUGH ITS
PRINCIPAL SECRETARY
(EDUCATION) GOVT OF H.P.
2. THE DIRECTOR ELEMENTARY
EDUCATION GOVT. OF HP
3. SHRUTI CHOWDHARY W/O NOT
KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER,
PRESENTLY POSTED AS TGT
MEDICAL AT GSSS SAMRA (B.
MEHTA) CHAMBA H.P.
....RESPONDENTS
(SH. ASHOK SHARMA, A.G.
WITH SH. KUNAL THAKUR, MS.
DIVYA SOOD, DY. A.GS. AND SH.
::: Downloaded on - 09/11/2022 20:31:11 :::CIS
2
RAJAT CHAUHAN, LAW OFFICER,
FOR RESPONDENTS-STATE).
.
This Petition coming on for orders this day, the Hon'ble Mr.
Justice Tarlok Singh Chauhan, passed the following:-
ORDER
Notice. Mr. Rajat Chauhan, learned Law Officer,
appears and waives service of notice on behalf of respondents
No. 1 and 2.
2. The instant petition has been filed for grant of the
following substantive reliefs:-
I) That in view of the above mentioned facts and circumstances, the impugned transfer order dated 31.10.2022 (Annexure P-1) may kindly be quashed and
set aside qua the petitioner.
ii) That the respondents may kindly be directed to allow the present petition to perform his duties at his present
place of posting i.e. Government Senior Secondary School Jalot, District Kangra, Himachal Pradesh till the completion
of session 2022-2023, in the interest of justice and fair play.
3. It would be noticed that the only ground on which the
petitioner seeking quashing of transfer order is founded on
individual hardship. However, it is more than settled that the Courts
are extremely slow to interfere directly in personal hardship cases.
The clear implication of the almost consistent directions given in the
cases are that the transferee could make a representation to the
competent authority.
4. Reference in this regard can conveniently be made to a
judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Rajendra Roy vs.
.
Union of India and another (1993) 1 SCC 148, wherein it was
observed as under:
"7..... The appellant has not made any representation about personal hardship to the 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."
5. Accordingly, without going into the merits of the case,
we deem it proper to dispose of this petition by directing the
respondents to consider the representation (Annexure P-5) of the
petitioner sympathetically within a period of four weeks' from today.
In the meanwhile, the petitioner shall be entitled to avail leave of
the kind due. Ordered accrdingly.
5. The petition stands disposed of in the aforesaid terms,
so also pending application(s), if any.
6. For compliance to come up on 05.12.2022.
(Tarlok Singh Chauhan)
Judge
(Virender Singh)
th
7 November, 2022 (sanjeev) Judge
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!