Veena Devi vs State Of Himachal Pradesh & Ors
2023 Latest Caselaw 18392 HP

Himachal Pradesh High Court

Veena Devi vs State Of Himachal Pradesh & Ors on 24 November, 2023

          IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH
                         AT SHIMLA

                                      CWP No.5986 of 2023
                                      Decided on: 24th November, 2023




                                                                         .
    ________________________________________________________





    Veena Devi                               ....Petitioner

                                             Versus





    State of Himachal Pradesh & ors.                                    ....Respondents




                                               of
    Coram
    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ranjan Sharma, Judge
    1 Whether approved for reporting?

                     rt
    For the petitioner                   :    Mr.   M.A.
                                              Advocate with
                                                            Khan,
                                                              Mr.
                                                                     Senior
                                                                     Azmat

                                              Hayat Khan,   Advocate.

    For the respondents                  :    Mr. Rajan Kahol, Additional
                                              Advocate     General,   for


                                              respondents No.1 and 2.

                                              Mr. Anirudh Sharma, Advocate




                                              for respondent No.3.





    Ranjan Sharma, Judge (Oral)

Heard, Mr. M.A. Khan, Senior Advocate, Mr.

Rajan Kahol, learned Additional Advocate General and

Mr. Anirudh Sharma, at length.

Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes

2. After hearing Mr. M.A. Khan, learned Senior

Advocate, for some time, he submits on instructions of

the petitioner that the petitioner has certain hardships,

.

notwithstanding the fact that the petitioner has

completed almost two years and more than eleven

months now as Senior Assistant in the office of District

Attorney at Nahan. He fairly submits that he may be

of permitted to make a representation to Respondent No.2-

Director of Prosecution, Himachal Pradesh, seeking rt redressal of hardships/grievances. Additionally, he

submits that one post is vacant in the office of Assistant

District Attorney at Dehra, where case of the petitioner

could be considered.

3. Per contra, Mr. Rajan Kahol, learned

Additional Advocate General, submits that the petitioner,

in law has neither any fundamental right nor any legal

right to seek retention or posting at station of choice. Mr.

Anirudh Sharma, learned counsel appearing for

Respondent No.3, also follows suit, with the similar

objection, but submits that on the basis of the impugned

order dated 25.08.2023 (Annexure P-2) private

respondent has joined at Nahan.

.

4. In rebuttal, Mr. M.A. Khan, learned Senior

Counsel, submits that though in normal parlance, it is

trite law that an employee does not have any

fundamental or legal right to seek retention or to seek

of posting at station of choice or convenient stations. But

this case is an exception to the aforesaid principle of law rt for the reasons that in view of the hardships now

expressed and which are borne out from the pleading

also the hardships as per law in the case of Shilpi Bose

(Mrs.) and others versus State of Bihar and others,

1991 Supp (2) 659 and in State of Uttar Pradesh and

others versus Gobardhan Lal and connected matter,

(2004) 11 SCC 402, are to be examined and redressed

by the Competent Authority.

5. Be that as it may, in above facts and

circumstances of the case and as requested by learned

Senior Counsel, this Court permits the petitioner without

going into the merits of the matter to make a

representation to the Respondent No.2-Director of

.

Prosecution, Himachal Pradesh within four days from

today; with further directions to the aforesaid respondent

to examine/consider the representation to pass

appropriate orders, in accordance with law, within two

of weeks thereafter. Till Decision of the representation, the

present status as on day of the petitioner and private rt respondent shall continue.

6. Needless to say that, this Court has not adverted

to the rival contentions and merits of the matter and all

questions of facts and law are left open.

In aforesaid terms, the writ petition as well as

the pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also

stand disposed of, accordingly.

(Ranjan Sharma) Judge November 24, 2023 (Shivender)