WPSB/563/2022
2022 Latest Caselaw 3027 UK

                Office Notes,
             reports, orders or
SL.           proceedings or
      Date                                  COURT'S OR JUDGES'S ORDERS
No             directions and
             Registrar's order
              with Signatures
                                  WPSB No.563 of 2022
                                  Shri Vipin Sanghi, C.J.
                                  Shri Ramesh Chandra Khulbe, J.

Mr. Aishwarya Prakash Joshi and Mr. Mayank Rajan Joshi, learned counsel the petitioner.

Mr. C.S. Rawat, learned Chief Standing Counsel along with Mr. Gajendra Tripathi, learned Brief Holder for the State.

Issue notices.

Mr. C.S. Rawat, learned CSC accepts notices on behalf of the respondents. The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner has rendered 17 years of service in inaccessible area. By the impugned order dated 06.09.2022, the respondents have sought to attach him to Government Degree College, Pithoragarh. He is presently posted at Government Degree College, Gopeshwar, Chamoli. The petitioner submits that the so-called attachment tantamounts to transfer. He also submits that the attachment is not permissible in terms of the Government Order dated 28.06.2007.

The petitioner has enlisted seven other teachers teaching in the same subject i.e. B.Ed., who have not done any service in inaccessible areas. However, they have not been attached and the petitioner has been sought to be attached to a Durgam area on the orders of the Minister while dealing with the case of transfer from Durgam to Sugam area of the wife of the Director, Higher Education. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the present is a similar case to the one dealt with by this Court in

WPSB No.549 of 2022.

On the other hand, Mr. Rawat has tendered in Court the judgment dated 02.08.2021 rendered by the Division Bench in WPSB No.279 of 2021) to submit that after the enactment of the Uttarakhand Annual Transfer for Public Servants Act, 2017, the Government Order dated 28.06.2007 has lost its course. Therefore, the petitioner could be attached as done by the impugned order. Even if, one would accept that position, there is no explanation by the respondents as to why the petitioner has been picked up for attachment when he has already done over 17 years of service in inaccessible area, while there are, at least, seven others, who were equally qualified and one of whom could have been attached and who have not rendered any service in Durgam area. It is for the respondents to explain their aforesaid conduct.

We, therefore, stay the operation of the impugned order dated 06.09.2022 as well as the reliving order dated 13.09.2022 till the next date.

The respondents should file counter affidavit within four weeks.

Rejoinder affidavit be filed before the next date.

List on 06.12.2022.

(R.C. Khulbe, J.) (Vipin Sanghi, C.J.) 20.09.2022 SS/RB