Uttarakhand High Court
Shri Dhirendra Kumar Tripathi vs State Of Uttarakhand And Others on 11 July, 2018
Bench: K.M. Joseph, Sharad Kumar Sharma
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
WRIT PETITION (S/B) NO. 294 OF 2018
Shri Dhirendra Kumar Tripathi .................Petitioner
Versus
State of Uttarakhand and others. .......Respondents
Mr. Alok Mahra, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. Paresh Tripathi, Chief Standing Counsel for the State of Uttarakhand / respondents.
Coram: Hon'ble K.M. Joseph, C.J.
Hon'ble Sharad Kumar Sharma, J.
Dated: 11th July,2018
K.M. Joseph, C.J. (Oral)
The petitioner, who was promoted as Chief
Administrative Officer vide order dated 16.10.2017 and who joined pursuant to the said order on 30.10.2017 in the office of the Deputy Education Officer, Ramgarh, District Nainital, has now, by the impugned order, been transferred to Paati, District Champawat. In short, the complaint of the petitioner is that under Uttarakhand Public Servants Annual Transfer Act, 2017 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), Ramgarh is to be treated as an inaccessible area as per the categorization made by the Director General of School Education. The Act does not contemplate transfer from one inaccessible area to another inaccessible area as it is the case of the petitioner that Paati in District Champawat is an inaccessible area. In fact, the petitioner has also referred to another order (Annexure-7 to the writ petition), whereby Ramgarh has been treated as an inaccessible area, in support of his case. Petitioner has already moved a representation before respondent no. 2 purporting to be under Section 22(4) of the Act. According to the petitioner, it has been done within time. The petitioner would submit that no one has been posted in his place.
2. Having heard Mr. Alok Mahra, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Paresh Tripathi, Chief Standing Counsel for the State of Uttarakhand / respondents, we are inclined to dispose of the writ petition by directing Annexure-8 representation of the petitioner to be disposed of in accordance with law.
3. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of as follows:
-2-We direct the second respondent to consider and take a decision on Annexure-8 representation of the petitioner in accordance with law within a period of ten days from the date of production of a certified copy of this judgment before him. The petitioner will produce a copy of this judgment within three days from today before the second respondent. We also leave open all the contentions of the petitioner and liberty to move this Court again seeking the relief(s) other than what we have already granted by this judgment. Till such time a decision is taken on the representation of the petitioner, the impugned order, insofar as it relates to the petitioner, will be kept in abeyance.
4. Let certified copy of this order be issued today itself.
(Sharad Kumar Sharma J.) (K.M. Joseph, C.J.)
11.07.2018
Rathour