Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 2]

Himachal Pradesh High Court

Archana Devi vs State Of H.P. & Others on 28 August, 2020

Bench: L. Narayana Swamy, Anoop Chitkara

    IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA

                                                CWP No. 4488 of 2019
                                  Date of decision: 28.08.2012
    _____________________________________________________




                                                                            .
    Archana Devi                                       .....Petitioner





                      Versus

    State of H.P. & others                          ...Respondents
    _________________________________________________________





    Coram:
    The Hon'ble Mr. Justice L. Narayana Swamy, Chief Justice
    The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Anoop Chitkara, Judge.
    Whether approved for reporting?1
    __________________________________________________
    For the petitioner :                Mr. Naresh Kaul, Advocae, through Video





                                        Conferencing.

    For the respondents:                Mr. Ashok Sharma, Advocate General with
                                        Mr. Adarsh Sharma and Ms. Ritta Goswami,
                        r               Additional Advocates General, through Video
                                        Conferencing.

    L. Narayana Swamy, Chief Justice                (Oral)

By way of this writ petition, the petitioner, who is working as PTA teacher (on contract basis), has challenged the transfer order dated 23.08.2019, (Annexure P-

4), hereinafter referred to as 'the impugned order', whereby she has been transferred from Government Senior Secondary School, Garnota to Government Senior Secondary School, Mail.

2. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that pursuant to the impugned transfer order, the petitioner has been relieved and she has joined at the transferred station.

3. On the other hand, learned Additional Advocate General submits that since the petitioner has been relieved and she 1 Whether the reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

::: Downloaded on - 28/08/2020 20:19:49 :::HCHP -2-

has joined at the transferred station, the impugned transfer order becomes infructuous.

4. We have heard learned Counsel for the parties and .

perused the entire record carefully.

5. Since the petitioner has joined at the transferred station, the question of quashing the impugned transfer order does not arise. Therefore, at this juncture, we do not find it appropriate to interfere in this matter. However, we deem it appropriate to dispose of this writ petition reserving liberty to the petitioner to file a representation alongwith supporting documents before the respondents-State/competent Authority within one week from today and the respondents-State/competent Authority are directed to examine the same and pass appropriate orders within three weeks thereafter.

6. Pending application(s), if any, stands disposed of.

(L. Narayana Swamy) Chief Justice.

    August 28, 2020                                   (Anoop Chitkara)
     (hemlata)                                               Judge.




                                             ::: Downloaded on - 28/08/2020 20:19:49 :::HCHP