High CourtsDivision Bench

Manohar Lal vs State Of H. P. & Ors

High Court Of Himachal Pradesh · Decided on 6 July 2021 · Citation: (2021) 07 SHI CK 0043

HON’BLE JUDGES
Tarlok Singh Chauhan, J · Satyen Vaidya, J
RESULT
Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
Civil Writ Petition No. 3684 Of 2020
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

20 paragraphs · 324 words

Tarlok Singh Chauhan, J

1.

Aggrieved by the order of transfer dated 01.07.2021 (Annexure P- 1), the petitioner has filed the instant petition for the grant of following

substantive relief:-

A. A Writ of certiorari may kindly be issued to quash the office order dated 01.07.2021 (Annexure P-1) and relieving order dated 02.07.2021

(Annexure P-5).

2.

It would be noticed that the sole reason for the transfer of the petitioner is that one Ashwani Kumar, whose services had earlier been terminated,

have now been ordered to be re-engaged vide office order dated 01.07.2021. Therefore, the order of transfer in the given circumstances cannot be

interferred with.

3.

However, it would be noticed from the perusal of the Medical Certificates (Annexure P-4), that the son of the petitioner is Locomotor Impaired and

suffers from disability to the extent of 75%.

4.

In the Transfer Policy framed by the State Government, there is preferential treatment provided in the matters of postings and transfers to the

parent(s) who have differently abled children.

5.

Therefore, in the given facts and circumstances, while dismissing the petition, we permit the petitioner to file a representation before respondent No.

2 within a period of one week from today, clearly setting out therein five stations of his choice. In case, such representation is made within the

stipulated period, then respondents, in turn, shall consider the same and issue/pass necessary order of posting/transfer, if possible, in any one of the

five stations of his choice.

6.

However, in case, this is not possible, then fresh option be called from the petitioner and thereafter the entire exercise again be completed within a

further period of three weeks.

7.

In the meanwhile, no coercive steps be taken against the petitioner, so as to compel him to join at the transferred station.

8.

The petition is disposed of in the aforesaid terms, so also pending applications, if any. Parties are left to bear their own costs.