Himachal Pradesh High Court
Karam Chand vs Rohit Jamwal on 15 November, 2019
Author: Ajay Mohan Goel
Bench: Ajay Mohan Goel
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
COPCT No. 24 of 2019
.
Decided on: 15.11.2019.
Karam Chand ....Petitioner.
Versus
Rohit Jamwal ...Respondents.
Coram
The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge.
Whether approved for reporting?1 No
For the petitioner : Mr. Avinash Jaryal, Advocate.
For the respondent
r : Mr. Dinesh Thakur, Additional
Advocate General with M/s Seema
Sharma, Amit Kumar Dhumal and
Divya Sood, Deputy Advocate
Generals for the respondent.
: Mr. Rohit Jamwal, Director,
Elementary Education, present in
person.
Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge (Oral)
By way of this contempt petition, petitioner alleges willful disobedience of order passed by the learned Tribunal in O.A. No. 2917 of 2019, titled as Karam Chand vs. State of Himachal Pradesh and others, dated 15.07.2019, which original application stood disposed of by the learned Tribunal by passing the following directions:-
::: Downloaded on - 15/11/2019 20:26:15 :::HCHP"Consequently, the present original application is disposed of with a direction to 2nd respondent to .
transfer the applicant to a soft station, preferably to one of the stations detailed in para 6(III) of the original application, by 10th August, 2019."
2. It appears that as even after the filing of the representation by the present petitioner, no action was being taken to transfer the petitioner in terms of the order passed by the learned Tribunal, petitioner preferred this contempt petition.
3. Learned Additional Advocate General has submitted that though there was some delay in the implementation of the directions so passed by the learned Tribunal, which he has duly explained, however, now the petitioner stands transferred and adjusted at G.P.S. Tikri (Kaini), against a vacant post, which is a soft area in District Chamba. This fact is not disputed by the learned Counsel for the petitioner. However, he submits that as the petitioner is on the verge of superannuation and he has less one year to retire, therefore, it would have been prudent had the petitioner been adjusted at a station of his choice, as were mentioned in the representation filed by him.
4. Having heard learned Counsel for the petitioner as also learned Additional Advocate General and having perused communication dated 14.11.2019, addressed by Director, ::: Downloaded on - 15/11/2019 20:26:15 :::HCHP Elementary Education to the Government of Himachal Pradesh, to the office of learned Advocate General, this Court is of the view .
that it cannot be said that as of now, there is any willful disobedience of the order which was passed by the learned Tribunal in O.A. No. 2917 of 2019, dated 15.07.2019. However, as the petitioner is stated to be superannuating in November, 2020, it shall be open for the petitioner to approach the competent authority for consideration of his case to be posted at a place, which may be near to his home place. It is made clear that in case any such representation is received by the authority concerned from the petitioner, then, the same shall be considered sympathetically within a period of three weeks from receipt thereof, however, taking into consideration the administrative convenience of the Department.
The contempt petition stands disposed of in above terms, so also, pending miscellaneous application(s), if any. Notice discharged.
(Ajay Mohan Goel) Judge November 15, 2019 (narender) ::: Downloaded on - 15/11/2019 20:26:15 :::HCHP