Himachal Pradesh High Court
Conservaor Of Forests (R & vs Union Of India And Others on 14 July, 2022
Bench: Tarlok Singh Chauhan, Chander Bhusan Barowalia
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA
ON THE 14th DAY OF JULY, 2022
.
BEFORE
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TARLOK SINGH CHAUHAN
&
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDER BHUSAN BAROWALIA
CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 3400 OF 2022
Between:-
r to
SHRI MAN SINGH S/O LATE SHRI
SHER SINGH, R/O VILLAGE &
POST OFFICE RATTI, TEHSIL
BALH, DISTRICT MANDI,
PRESENTLY WORKING AS
SUPERINTENDENT GRADE-i,
OFFICE OF THE ADDL. PR. CHIEF
CONSERVAOR OF FORESTS (R &
T), SUNDER NAGAR, DISTRICT
MANDI, (H.P.)
...PETITIONER
(SH. RAKESH KUMAR DOGRA
ADVOCATE)
AND
1. STATE OF HIMACHAL PAREESH
THROUGH ITS ADDITIONAL CHIEF
SECRETARY (FORESTS) TO THE
GOVERNMENT OF HIMACHAL
PAREDESH, SHIMLA-171002
(H.P.)
2. THE PRINCIPAL CHIEF
CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS
(HOFF), HIMACHAL PRADESH,
SHIMLA-171001 (H.P.).
3. THE ADDL. PR. CHIEF
CONSERVAOR OF FORESTS
::: Downloaded on - 14/07/2022 20:03:54 :::CIS
2
(R&T), SUNDER NAGAR, DISTRICT
MANDI, 175019 (H.P.)
.
4. SMT. NARVADA DEVI W/O LATE
SH. CHANDERMANI, R/O VILLAGE
SAWAR, POST OFFICE PURANA
BAZAR, TEHSIL SUNDER NAGAR,
DISTRICT MANDI (H.P.),
RECENTLY PROMOTED AS
SUPERINTENDENT GRADE-i,
OFFICE OF THE ADDL. PR. CHIEF
CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS
(R&T), SUNDER NAGAR, DISTRICT
MANDI - 175019 (H.P.)
...RESPONDENTS
(SH. ASHOK SHARMA, A.G.
WITH SH. RAJINDE DOGRA, SR.
ADDL. A.G., SH. BHUPINDER
THAKUR,
SH. YUDHBIR
THAKUR, DY. A.GS. AND SH.
RAJAT CHAUHAN, LAW OFFICER,
FOR RESPONDENTS-STATE
SH. VIKRANT THAKUR,
ADVOCATE, FOR RESPONDENT
NO. 4.
This Petition coming on for order this day, the Hon'ble Mr. Justice
Tarlok Singh Chauhan, passed the following:-
ORDER
Aggrieved by the order of transfer, the petitioner has filed the instant petition for the grant of following substantive reliefs:-
i. That the impugned notification dated 27.05.2022 (Annexure P-7) passed by the respondent No. 1 may very kindly be set aside and quashed being wrong, arbitrary, illegal, discriminatory and violative of the transfer policy ::: Downloaded on - 14/07/2022 20:03:54 :::CIS 3 framed by the govt. of Himachal Paadesh, by issuing writ of certiorari.
.
(ii) That a writ in the nature of mandamus may kindly be issued, directing the respondents to retain the petitioner at Sunder Nagar in the office of the respondent No. 3 till his retirement i.e. upto 31.03.2023 and justice be done.
2. One of the main contentions raised by the petitioner for assailing his transfer order is that private respondent No. 4 on promotion had to be essentially transferred and could not have been ordered to be retained at the same station. However, the learned counsel for the petitioner could not place any Rules/Instructions/Guidelines, which make it mandatory for having incumbent to transfer on his/her promotion.
3. It is further contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that transfer is outcome of the D.O. note, however, this contention is clearly without merit as the transfer in the instant case has been approved by none other than the Minister In-charge of the Department.
4. It is more than settled that transfer is an incidence of service and, therefore, normally no exception to the same can be taken. Whether, and if so where, an employee should be posted are matters which are governed by the exigencies of service, which again is the sole prerogative of the employer unless vitiated by malafides or extraneous reasons. An employee has no fundamental right or for that matter vested right to claim ::: Downloaded on - 14/07/2022 20:03:54 :::CIS 4 transfer or posting. Executive instructions and administrative directions concerning transfers and postings do not confer an .
indefeasible right to claim a transfer or posting. Individual convenience of persons who are employed in the service is subject to the overarching needs of the administration and the policies which stipulate for a tenure are requirement of the administration.
7. This is so held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in a fairly recent judgment in S. K. Nausad Rahaman and others vs. Union of India and others, AIR 2022 SC 1494.
8. In view of the aforesaid discussion and for the reasons stated above, we find no merit in this petition and the same is accordingly dismissed. Parties are left to bear their own costs.
All interim orders are vacated.
(Tarlok Singh Chauhan) Judge (Chander Bhusan Barowalia) th 14 July, 2022 Judge (sanjeev) ::: Downloaded on - 14/07/2022 20:03:54 :::CIS