Punjab-Haryana High Court
Virender Singh vs The Sonepat Central Cooperative Bank ... on 30 January, 2013
Author: Rajesh Bindal
Bench: Rajesh Bindal
CWP No. 22495 of 2012 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
CWP No. 22495 of 2012 (O&M)
Date of decision : 30.1.2013
Virender Singh .. Petitioner
versus
The Sonepat Central Cooperative Bank Limited
and others .. Respondents
Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal
Present: Mr. G. S. Sandhu, Advocate, for the petitioner.
Mr. Subhash Ahuja, Advocate, for respondent nos. 1 and 2.
Mr. Vikram Punia, Advocate, for respondent no. 4.
Rajesh Bindal, J.
1. The petitioner, who is working as Secretary of the Rai Primary Agricultural Cooperative Society Limited, Rai, District Sonepat (for short, 'Rai') has approached this court challenging his transfer order dated 5.11.2012 from Rai to the Jakhouli Primary Agricultural Cooperative Society Limited, Jakhouli, District Sonepat (for short, 'Jakhouli').
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that on 16.12.2011, the petitioner was transferred from the Primary Agricultural Cooperative Society Limited, Garhi Brahmanan, to the head office of the Sonepat Central Cooperative Bank Limited, Sonepat. On 31.1.2012, he was transferred from the Head office to Jakhouli. On 9.8.2012, the petitioner was transferred from Jakhouli to Rai and in less than three months vide impugned order dated 5.11.2012 he was again transferred from Rai to Jakhouli. This transfer was made to adjust respondent no. 3, as respondent no. 4, who is MLA of Rai Constituency in District Sonepat, had directed for his transfer. The distance between two places of posting is merely 3 kilometers and there was no good reason to transfer the petitioner in less than three months after he was posted at Rai.
3. On the other hand, learned counsel for the official respondents submitted that the transfer of the petitioner has not been made on the CWP No. 22495 of 2012 2 recommendations of the MLA. The communication from the MLA dated 22.5.2012 as annexed with the petition never reached the respondent-bank. The transfer of respondent no. 3 was made on his request in public interest. It was for the reason that he wanted to be posted near his home so as to enable him to take care of his old parents. He had come to District Sonepat from District Faridabad on permanent basis after foregoing his seniority, as the cadre in which the petitioner as well as private respondent are working is at district level.
4. Learned counsel for respondent no. 4 namely Jai Tirath, MLA Rai, District Sonepat, submitted that he in his capacity as representative of the public of Rai constituency is bound to carry the normal routine work of any person who come to him for assistance which includes giving notes for transfers etc. It is a part of the normal routine work. The answering respondent does not have any interest in any particular individual. Issuance of the letter of recommendation dated 22.5.2012 is not denied as such.
5. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the paper book.
6. The petitioner, who was posted at head office of the Sonepat Central Cooperative Bank Limited was transferred on 31.1.2012 to Jakhouli from there he was transferred to Rai on 9.8.2012. He was again transferred to Jakhouli vide order dated 5.11.2012, which is impugned in the present writ petition. The distance between the two places is merely 3 kilometers. Swapping of places by the petitioner and respondent no. 3 is stated to be to adjust respondent no. 3 on his request for transfer to Rai to enable him to take care of his old parents. Respondent no. 3 is stated to be resident of village Garhiwalaji, District Sonepat. The distance thereof from Rai is 13 kilometers whereas Jakhouli is about 15 kilometers from there. Apparently, there is not much difference in the distance of two places in case taken from the residence of respondent no. 3 where his parents are residing.
7. Besides this fact, another important fact which is not in dispute is that directions were issued by respondent no. 4 Jai Tirath Singh, MLA Rai, vide communication dated 22.5.2012 (Annexure P-6), to the Chief Executive Officer of the Sonepat Central Cooperative Bank Limitted, CWP No. 22495 of 2012 3 Sonepat, to transfer respondent no. 3 from Garhi Kesari to Rai. Apparently the directions were carried out immediately as vide order dated 22.5.2012 (Annexure P-7), respondent no. 3 was transferred from Garhi Kesari to Rai. Interference of MLA in administrative matters of the Bank cannot be appreciated. Thereafter again respondent no. 3 was transferred to Jakhouli on 9.8.2012 and the petitioner was asked to swap place with him as he was already worked at Jakhouli having been transferred on 31.1.2012. The present transfer vide impugned order dated 5.11.2012 is stated to be on a request made by respondent no. 3 citing the reason of his ailing parents but the fact remains that distance of village of respondent no. 3 where his parents are residing is merely 13 kilometers from Rai and 15 kilometers from Jakhouli. The difference is not that much which could be stated to be a consideration for transferring respondent no. 3 back to Rai by disturbing the petitioner who had merely been transferred to Rai on 9.8.2012. It cannot be said to be an administrative reason especially keeping in view the background of the case where earlier respondent no. 3 was transferred on political interference. And since 16.12.2011, the petitioner had been transferred thrice.
8. In view of my aforesaid discussions, the impugned order, Annexure P-5, transferring the petitioner from Rai to Jakhouli is quashed.
9. The writ petition stands disposed of.
30.1.2013 (Rajesh Bindal)
vs Judge
Refer to Reporter