Himachal Pradesh High Court
Babli Devi vs State Of H.P. & Others on 6 January, 2020
Bench: Dharam Chand Chaudhary, Anoop Chitkara
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA.
.
CWP No.27 of 2020.
Decided on: 6th January, 2020.
Babli Devi ......Petitioner.
Versus
State of H.P. & Others ....Respondents.
Coram
The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Dharam Chand Chaudhary, Judge. The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Anoop Chitkara, Judge.
Whether approved for reporting?1 No. For the petitioner : Mr. Anil Kumar, Advocate.
For the respondents : Mr. J.S. Guleria, Dy. A.G. for respondents No.1 to 3.
Dharam Chand Chaudhary, J. (oral).
The petitioner is working as JBT Teacher and presently posted as such in Government Centre Primary School, Nagan Education Block, Chauntra-I, District Mandi, H.P. She has now been ordered to be transferred to Government Primary School Bardhar, Education Block Drang-I, District Mandi, H.P., vide impugned order Annexure P-1.
1Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes.
::: Downloaded on - 07/01/2020 20:25:41 :::HCHP 22. The complaint is that the transfer of the .
petitioner has been ordered on the basis of a D.O. note. It is keeping in view such averments, following order came to be passed in this writ petition on 17.12.2019:-
" Notice. Mr. Vikas Rathore, learned Additional Advocate General appears and accepts service of notice on behalf of respondents No.1 to 3. No notice to respondent No.4 at this stage. List on 6th January, 2020.
2. In view of the allegations in the writ petition that the petitioner has been transferred on the basis of D.O. Note, entire record leading to the transfer of the petitioner be produced on the next date.
3. In the meanwhile, status quo, as on today, qua the transfer of the petitioner vide impugned order Annexure P-1, shall be maintained."
3. Consequently, learned Deputy Advocate General has produced the record. The averments in the writ petition that the petitioner has been ::: Downloaded on - 07/01/2020 20:25:41 :::HCHP 3 transferred on D.O. note find support from the .
records as it is the office of the Chief Minister which has recommended her transfer from the present place of posting by way of such note.
4. True it is that this Court in Sanjay Kumar vs. State of Himachal Pradesh and others, 2013(3) Shimla Law Cases 1373 and also Amir Chand vs. State of Himachal Pradesh 2013(2) Him. L.R. 648 and in its recent judgment rendered in CWP No.2490 of 2019, titled Dalip Singh versus State of H.P. & Others has held that the Chief Minister and Ministers/elected representatives may recommend the transfer of an employee, however, the transfer order has ultimately to be issued by the Administrative Head on application of mind and uninfluenced by the recommendations so made by the elected representative. In the case in hand, the competent authority, respondent No.2 has not examined the desirability of the transfer of the petitioner in terms ::: Downloaded on - 07/01/2020 20:25:41 :::HCHP 4 of the transfer policy and also as to whether her .
transfer would be in the larger public interest and rather transferred the petitioner from her present place of posting, merely on the basis of recommendations made by political executive. The impugned order, Annexure P-1, as such, is not legally sustainable. The same is accordingly set aside, leaving it open to respondent No.2 to transfer the petitioner, if required, in accordance with law and also the transfer policy.
5. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of, so also the pending application(s), if any.
(Dharam Chand Chaudhary) Judge.
(Anoop Chitkara) Judge.
January 06, 2020 (ps)
::: Downloaded on - 07/01/2020 20:25:41 :::HCHP