Neeta Devi vs State Of Himachal Pradesh Through Its And Others

Mohammad Rafiq, CJ

This writ petition has been filed by petitioner­Neeta Devi, who is working with the respondents­Department as Lecturer in the subject of Hindi, aggrieved by her transfer from Government Senior Secondary School Nigulsari (Kinnaur) to Government Senior Secondary School, Sapni (Kinnaur), vice respondent No. 4­Kiran Kumari.

As per the facts averred in the writ petition, the petitioner was initially appointed as Lecturer/Lecturer (SN) Hindi on contract basis on 28th October, 2010 and posted at Government Senior Secondary School Chagaon in District Kinnaur. Subsequently, services of the petitioner were regularized in April, 2016. She was then transferred from Government Senior Secondary School Chagaon to Government Senior Secondary School Nigulsari on 6th September, 2016. It is contended that the petitioner submitted a representation to the respondents in May, 2021 to transfer her to some soft station as Government Senior Secondary School Nigulsari happens to fall in a tribal area. The petitioner gave the choice of three places where she could be posted, which were, Government Senior Secondary School, Rampur; Government Senior Secondary School Jeori, Rampur; and Government Senior Secondary School Badhal, Rampur, in District Shimla. The said representation of the petitioner was forwarded by the Principal, Government Senior Secondary School, Nigulsari, however, respondent No. 2­Director, Higher Education, vide order, dated 9th December, 2021, has passed the impugned transfer order of the petitioner.

Mr. Vikas Rathore, learned Additional Advocate General, submitted that the petitioner has completed more than five years at the present place of posting and thus has served more than the normal tenure of three years at one place. Therefore, in any case, she is liable to be transferred anywhere in the State, in terms of the Transfer Policy of the State.

As regards the representation of the petitioner, the learned Additional Advocate General submitted that as per Clause 16.1 of the Office Memorandum, dated 10th July, 2013, containing the Comprehensive Guiding Principles­2013 for regulating the transfer of State Government employees, the petitioner is required to give an option of five stations of choice for more than one District, whereas the option given by the petitioner in her representation (Annexure P­1) indicates that she has given the choice of only three places, all of which happen to fall in District Shimla.

Having regard to the submissions made, we are not inclined to interfere with the impugned transfer order (Annexure P­2), but, at the same time, keeping in view the fact that the petitioner has already served in the tribal area, we dispose of this writ petition requiring the petitioner to file a fresh representation to respondent No. 2­Director, Higher Education, in conformity with the aforesaid Clause 16.1 of the Office Memorandum, dated 10th July, 2013, contained in the Comprehensive Guiding Principles­2013 for regulating the transfer of State Government employees, giving option of five stations of choice in more than one District. If any such representation is filed by the petitioner, respondent No. 2­ Director, Higher Education shall consider and pass appropriate order on the representation of the petitioner within a period of fifteen days from the date of filing of the representation alongwith a copy of this order.

Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall also stand disposed of.