Amarnath vs State of Uttarakhand & anther

Sudhanshu Dhulia, J.

The petitioner was a Peon in the Elementary Education Department. Subsequently, the petitioner was promoted from Class â€" IV to Class â€" III

vide order dated 03.07.2015 and thereafter vide order dated 25.06.2018 he was transferred as a Junior Assistant from District Haridwar to District

Tehri Garhwal. This transfer order was challenged by the petitioner before this Court in WPSS No.2154 of 2018 in which a learned Single Judge of

this Court vide order dated 12.07.2018 had granted limited relief to the petitioner by directing the authorities to consider the representation of the

petitioner. The relevant portion of the order dated 12.07.2018 passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court reads as under:-

“Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that his transfer is in violation of Section 23 of Transfer Act, 2013 inasmuch as according to him, the

deadline fixed in section 23 is 10.06.2018, while the transfer order has been passed on 25.06.2018.

Since, transfer is an incidence of service and a transfer order can be challenged on very limited grounds, therefore, I am not inclined to interfere with

the transfer order. However, petitioner shall be at liberty to make fresh representation to the Competent Authority I.e. Additional Director of

Education, Garhwal Division within a week from today. If such a representation is made, the Competent Authority shall consider and decide the same

by speaking order within four weeks thereafter.

Till decision on petitioner’s representation, status quo as regards his posting shall be maintained.

Let a certified copy of this order be supplied to learned counsel for the parties within 24 hours on payment of usual charges.â€​

Thereafter the representation of the petitioner has been considered and has been rejected. The ground raised by the petitioner was that he has been

transferred from “Sugam†to “Durgam†and for this transfer the services rendered by him in “Sugam†area on the Class IV have been

clubbed along with the services rendered by him on the Class III post of Junior Assistant, which ought not to have considered. This argument of

petitioner has been rejected and in view of this Court, it has rightly been done.

The only contention of the petitioner is that last cut-off date under Section 23 of the Uttarakhand Annual Transfer for Public Servants Act, 2017 is

10.06.2018 whereas he has been transferred on 25.06.2018. This aspect has not been considered by the appropriate Authority. This may be so, but the

petitioner cannot be given benefit of a minor technicality as the transfer is in exigency of service and it is for the first time that the petitioner is

transferred from District Haridwar to District Tehri Garhwal.

In view thereof, the writ petition stands dismissed.

It is, however, made clear that in case the petitioner does not join his new place of posting within a period of one week from today, the respondents

will be at liberty to take disciplinary action against the petitioner, in accordance with law.