Decided On: October 13 vs Himachal Road Transport ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 16372 HP

             IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA.

                                                CWP No. 5187 of 2023
                                          Decided on: October 13, 2023
    ________________________________________________________
    Narinder Kumar                                   ........... Petitioner




                                                                                .
                                   Versus





    Himachal Road Transport Corporation and others      .. Respondents
    ________________________________________________________
    Coram:
    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge.





    Whether approved for reporting? 1

    For the Petitioner                     :      Mr. Vinay Sharma, Advocate.

    For the respondents                    :      Mr. Anoop Rattan, Advocate General
                                                  with Mr. Rajan Kahol, Mr. Vishal





                                                  Panwar and      Mr. B.C. Verma,
                                                  Additional Advocates General with
                                                  Mr. Ravi Chauhan & Ms. Sunaina,
                                                  Deputy Advocates General.
                        r                         Mr. Naresh Kaul,             Advocate,     for

                                                  respondent No.5.

                                  Nemo for respondent No.5.
    ________________________________________________________
    Sandeep Sharma, Judge (oral):

By way of instant petition, challenge has been laid to order

dated 21.7.2023, issued by Director Higher Education, thereby ordering

transfer of the petitioner, who is a Lecturer (Physics) from Government

Senior Secondary School Sukhar, Kangra to Government Senior

Secondary School Khanni.

2. Precisely, the grouse of the petitioner as has been highlighted in

the petition and further canvassed by learned counsel for the petitioner

is that the impugned transfer order has been effected on the basis of a

DO Note.

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

3. Mr. B.C. Verma, learned Additional Advocate General, on

instructions states that the petitioner has completed normal tenure at

present place of posting and he has been transferred only at a distance

.

of 18 kms as such otherwise, impugned order cannot be termed as a

transfer rather petitioner has been adjusted at a nearby place.

4. Since the petitioner has completed normal tenure at present

place, coupled with the fact that he has been transferred to a station,

which is hardly 18 kms from previous place of posting, this court is not

persuaded to interfere with the impugned transfer order.

5.

applications.

r to The petition is accordingly dismissed, alongwith all pending

(Sandeep Sharma)

Judge October 13, 2023 Vikrant