Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Himachal Pradesh High Court

Kavya Sinha vs State Of H.P. And Others on 18 July, 2023

Author: Jyotsna Rewal Dua

Bench: Jyotsna Rewal Dua

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.3913 of 2023 Decided on: 18th July, 2023

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Kavya Sinha                                                       .....Petitioner




                                                                                    .
                                                Versus





    State of H.P. and others                                      .....Respondents

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua Whether approved for reporting? 1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Vivek Singh Attri and Mr. Abhinav Purohit, Advocates.

For the Respondents: Mr. Y.P.S. Dhaulta and Mr. Rupinder Singh Thakur, Additional Advocates General with Mr. Sumit Sharma, Deputy Advocate General, for respondents No.1 to 3.

Mr. A.K. Gupta, Advocate, for respondent No.4.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge

                     Today's          hearing         has        been        attended           by




    Sh. Rajesh Sharma, State Project Director,                                        Samagra

Shiksha Abhiyan, Himachal Pradesh. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the matter was heard. The State Project Director, Samagra Shiksha Abhiyan, HP, also made his submissions in the matter.

2. Simple facts required to be considered are that:-

2(i). The petitioner was appointed as TGT (Medical) at GSSS Deohari, District Kullu, where she served from 1 Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order? Yes. ::: Downloaded on - 19/07/2023 20:41:21 :::CIS 2 12.10.2001 to 20.05.2002. The petitioner thereafter was transferred to GSSS Banjar, District Kullu, where she served from 27.07.2002 to 2007. Petitioner was further transferred to GSSS Banethi, District Sirmour, where she .

remained posted from 2007 to 2013.

2(ii). During the years 2013 to 2015, the petitioner remained posted at GSSS Trilokpur, District Sirmour. The petitioner was promoted to the post of Lecturer (Hindi) and was transferred to GSSS Apron, District Sirmour, where she served from 16.09.2015 to 2019. Petitioner was transferred to DIET Nahan, District Sirmour in the year 2019.

2(iii). Respondent No.3-State Project Director, Samagra Shiksha Abhiyan, Himachal Pradesh, passed an order on 28.04.2023 (Annexure P-1), whereby respondent No.4-Sh. Ashwani Thakur, Lecturer (Computer Science), was ordered to be transferred from DIET Nahan, District Sirmour to DIET Shimla, vice one Smt. Ritu Mehta-Lecturer (English). Smt. Ritu Mehta-Lecturer (English) was adjusted against the vacant post of Lecturer (Music/Fine Arts) at DIET Shimla. One Smt. Anjani, Lecturer (Political Science) was adjusted against the vacant post of Lecturer (Computer Science) at DIET Nahan, District Sirmour occurred due to transfer of Sh. Ashwani Thakur (Respondent No.4).

2(iv). According to the petitioner, respondent No.4, i.e. Sh. Ashwani Thakur, was appointed as Lecturer in the year 2007 and regularized as such on 28.09.2010. Respondent No.4 was posted at DIET Nahan, District Sirmour on .

28.09.2010. He continued to serve ever since at DIET Nahan, District Sirmour. It was the first transfer of respondent No.4 under order dated 28.04.2023, whereby he was transferred from DIET Nahan, District Sirmour to DIET Shimla. The grievance of the petitioner is that instead of implementing the office order dated 28.04.2023 issued by respondent No.3-the State Project Director, Samagra Shiksha Abhiyan, Himachal Pradesh, the respondent No.2, i.e. the Director Higher Education, Himachal Pradesh passed another order on 13.06.2023 (Annexure P-2), whereby transfer of respondent No.4 from DIET Nahan, District Sirmour to DIET Shimla was cancelled. He was allowed to remain posted in DIET Nahan, District Sirmour.

In order to accommodate respondent No.4-Sh. Ashwani Thakur, petitioner was made a scapegoat. Petitioner was transferred from DIET Nahan to DIET Shimla under impugned office order dated 13.06.2023. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the impugned office order dated 13.06.2023 (Annexure P-2) has been issued on the basis of a D.O. note.

3. During hearing of the case, Sh. Rajesh Sharma, State Project Director, Samagra Shiksha Abhiyan, H.P. stated that he had issued the office order dated 28.04.2023 (Annexure P-1), ordering the transfer of respondent No.4 .

from DIET Nahan to DIET Shimla. That office order has been cancelled by respondent No.2-the Director Higher Education, Himachal Pradesh by another office order dated 13.06.2023 (Annexure P-2). In terms of office order dated 13.06.2023 (impugned herein), instead of transferring respondent No.4 from DIET Nahan, District Sirmour to DIET Shimla, it is the petitioner, who has been ordered to be transferred from DIET Nahan, District Sirmour to DIET Shimla. Sh. Rajesh Sharma further stated that office order dated 13.06.2023 has been passed by respondent No.2 without taking him (respondent No.3) into confidence.

Further that no consultation whatsoever was held by respondent No.2 with respondent No.3 before passing impugned office order dated 13.06.2023, cancelling office order dated 28.04.2023.

4. In view of the statement made by Sh. Rajesh Sharma, State Project Director, Samagra Shiksha Abhiyan, Himachal Pradesh and taking stock of submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, it will be in the interest of justice to maintain the status quo existing as on date ::: Downloaded on - 19/07/2023 20:41:21 :::CIS 5 and not to take further action in terms of the impugned office order dated 13.06.2023 (Annexure P-2).

5. In the given facts and circumstances, this writ petition is disposed of by directing respondents No.2 and 3 .

to jointly take a fresh call in the matter regarding transfer of all the concerned parties including the contesting parties to the lis. The fresh exercise be carried out by the competent authority in accordance with law and taking into consideration the relevant policy/instructions/guidelines on the subject, within ten days from today. The decision so arrived at shall also be communicated to the petitioner as well as private respondent No.4 and Smt. Anjani, Lecturer (Political Science). Till then, status quo existing as on date be maintained. All rights and contentions of the parties are left open.

The writ petition stands disposed of in the above terms, so also the pending miscellaneous application(s), if any.

                                              Jyotsna Rewal Dua
    July 18, 2023                                   Judge
         Mukesh




                                             ::: Downloaded on - 19/07/2023 20:41:21 :::CIS