Punjab-Haryana High Court
Seema vs State Of Haryana And Others on 22 July, 2021
Author: Arun Monga
Bench: Arun Monga
116
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
CWP-10429-2021
Date of decision: 22.07.2021
Dr. Seema ...Petitioner
Versus
State of Haryana and others ...Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN MONGA
Present: Mr. Tarundeep Singh, Advocate,
for the petitioner.
Mr. Saurabh Mohunta, DAG, Haryana.
(Presence marked through Video Conference)
-.-
ARUN MONGA, J. (ORAL)
Petitioner herein, inter alia, seeks issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari to quash the impugned order dated 18.05.2021 (Annexure P-8) vide which her representation seeking extension in deputation period at Madlauda, District Panipat, was rejected.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner was sent on deputation from Community Health Centre, Miran District Bhiwani to Madlauda, District Panipat on 16.09.2020. Her period of deputation was extended from time to time. Vide impugned order dated 18.05.2021, her request seeking extension in deputation period was rejected, which is contrary to the transfer policy as the case of the petitioner falls under the couple case category. Her husband has been serving as Veterinary Surgeon at Government Veterinary Hospital, Aher District Panipat. He submits that Department has not adopted any specific policy for its employees. He submits that petitioner submitted a representation dated 27.04.2021 1 of 2 ::: Downloaded on - 23-07-2021 05:34:29 ::: (Annexure P-7) and the same was rejected vide order dated 18.05.2021 (Annexure P-8). Hence, the instant petition.
3. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and gone through the case file.
4. Transfer/deputation being matter of administrative exigency, this Courtgenerally refrains to interfere and treads cautiously, unless it is a case of extreme hardship. The case in hand does not seem to be such so as to deserve any indulgence. Moreover, transfer is not a punishment but an essential aspect of service, particularly, on a transferable post.
5. The impugned order dated 18.05.2021 (Annexure P-8) does not call for any interference from this Court in exercise of its extraordinary writ jurisdiction vested under Article 226 of Constitution of India. However, petitioner is at liberty to pursue with the department for mitigation of her grievance.
6. Disposed of.
(ARUN MONGA)
JUDGE
22.07.2021
vandana
Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No
Whether reportable: Yes/No
2 of 2
::: Downloaded on - 23-07-2021 05:34:30 :::