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
8 paragraphs · 273 wordsRomesh Verma, J
The petitioner has approached this Court for grant of the following relief;
“That writ in the nature of certiorari may kindly be issued, quashing and setting aside the impugned office order dated 11.02.2026 (Annexure P-2) and office order dated 12.02.2026 (Annexure P-3), since the same are in violation of clause 5.5 of the transfer policy, in view of the fact that the petitioner has left less than one year for his superannuation and the impugned transfer has been made with malafide intention as a counterblast of the complaint (Annexure P-1) made by the petitioner.”
During the course of hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he shall be contented in case, he is permitted to make a representation to the respondents/authorities for the redressal of his grievances in time bound direction.
Without commenting upon the merits of the case, it is ordered that in case the petitioner makes a representation within three days from today, in that event, the respondents/authorities shall decide the same within a period of three weeks positively from today thereafter by passing a speaking order and the said order shall be communicated to the petitioner. Till then the petitioner may be permitted to work on the present place of posting i.e. O/o the SLBS Govt. Medical College, Mandi at Nerchowk.
Needless to say that this Court has not expressed anything on the merits of the case and respondents are at liberty to take a decision strictly in accordance with the provisions of law.
Petition stands disposed of in the aforesaid terms.
Pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed of.