Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Himachal Pradesh High Court

Naitik Dogra vs State Of H.P. And Others on 24 July, 2023

Author: Jyotsna Rewal Dua

Bench: Jyotsna Rewal Dua

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.4649 of 2023 Decided on: 24th July, 2023

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

    Naitik Dogra                                                      .....Petitioner




                                                                                     .

                                                  Versus


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

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua Whether approved for reporting? 1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Mukul Sood, Advocate.

For the Respondents: Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General r with Mr. Y.P.S. Dhaulta & Mr. Varun Chandel, Additional Advocates General and Ms. Seema Sharma & Mr. Sumit Sharma, Deputy Advocates General.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge Learned Additional Advocate General has placed on record copy of instructions dated 22.07.2023.

2. Heard.

3. The case of the petitioner is that he joined the respondent-Panchayati Raj Department as a Panchayat Secretary in the year 2005. After serving in several gram panchayats in District Kangra, the petitioner was posted at Gram Panchayat Harnera in August, 2022. He joined as such in Gram Panchayat Harnera on 08.08.2022. Vide 1 Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order? Yes.

impugned order dated 10.07.2023 (Annexure P-2), the petitioner has been transferred from Gram Panchayat Harnera, Development Block Rait to Gram Panchayat Balla, Development Block Sullah against the vacant post.

.

The contention of the petitioner is that he has completed just about 11 months in his present place of posting, the impugned transfer order, therefore, is not in consonance with the applicable transfer policy. It has been submitted that no one else has been posted in the place of the petitioner at Gram Panchayat Harnera. It has further been submitted that wife of the petitioner is in advanced stage of pregnancy. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has submitted a representation against the impugned transfer order to respondent No.2, vide Annexure P-4, seeking his adjustment to some other place, where the post is lying vacant. Learned counsel further submitted that the petitioner would be content in case the respondents are directed to decide the representation of the petitioner for his adjustment keeping in view his adverse family circumstances in a time-bound manner. This prayer is not opposed by learned Additional Advocate General.

4. Taking note of the above submission, this writ petition is disposed of by directing respondent No.2/ ::: Downloaded on - 24/07/2023 20:37:42 :::CIS 3 competent authority to decide the representation of the petitioner (Annexure P-4), stated to have been submitted on 14.07.2023, in accordance with law and applicable transfer policy, within a period of two weeks from today. The .

decision so arrived at shall also be communicated to the petitioner.

Till such decision, the operation of the impugned transfer order dated 10.07.2023 (Annexure P-2) shall remain stayed or in other words, the petitioner shall be allowed to work at Gram Panchayat Harnera, Development Block Rait.

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

                                                         Jyotsna Rewal Dua
    July 24, 2023                                              Judge





         Mukesh





                                                        ::: Downloaded on - 24/07/2023 20:37:42 :::CIS