High CourtsSingle Bench

Radha Devi vs State of Himachal Pradesh and Others

High Court Of Himachal Pradesh · Decided on 1 August 2011 · Citation: (2011) 08 SHI CK 0187

HON’BLE JUDGES
Rajiv Sharma, J
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
CWP No. 3618 of 2011
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

7 paragraphs · 466 words

Rajiv Sharma, J.—Petitioner was appointed as J.B.T. Teacher at Government Primary School, Marhuta (Chachiot-I) with effect from 16th February, 2005 to 8th February, 2007. Thereafter, she was transferred to Government Primary School, Kandha (Chachiot-II) on 8th February, 2007. The distance between these two schools is within the radius of 8 KMs. The Petitioner was transferred from Government Primary School, Kandha to Government Primary School Bagsaid on 30th April, 2011. She did not join her duties pursuant to transfer order dated 30th April, 2011 and in the meantime she was transferred to Government Primary School, Burna (Seraj-II) on 12th May, 2011.

2.

Mr. Lovneesh Kanwar, learned Counsel for the Petitioner has strenuously argued that the Petitioner has been transferred to accommodate Respondent No. 5. According to him, Respondent No. 5 has always remained posted within the radius of 10 to 12 KMs.

3.

According to Mr. Vikas Rathore, learned Deputy Advocate General since the Petitioner has remained posted within the radius of 8 KMs. since her initial appointment, there is No. illegality in her transfer order dated 12th May, 2011.

4.

I have heard the learned Counsel for the parties and gone through the pleadings carefully.

5.

Petitioner has remained posted within the radius of 8 KMs. since her initial appointment. The distance between Government Primary School, Kandha and Government Primary School, Marhuta is within the radius of 8 KMs. The Petitioner has never joined her duties pursuant to her transfer order, dated 30th April, 2011. She has now been transferred to Government Primary School, Baruna (Seraj-II) on 12th May, 2011. The transfer policy is not statutory in nature. The transfer orders can only be assailed on the limited ground if there is any mollified alleged against a particular person or the Petitioner has been discriminated against. In the instant case, since the Petitioner has remained posted within the radius of 8 KMs. since her initial appointment, there is No. illegality in transfer order dated 12th May, 2011 whereby the Petitioner has been transferred from Government Primary School, Kandha (Chachiot-II) to Government Primary School, Burna (Seraj-II). The transfer of the Petitioner is a routine order and there is No. merit in the contention of Mr. Lovneesh Kanwar that the same has been issued to accommodate the private Respondent. The Court has to see the stay of the Petitioner in and around a particular place and not of the Respondent.

6.

It is for the employer to decide where a particular incumbent is to be posted. The only criteria, which is required to be taken into consideration, is that the transfer order must be passed judiciously.

7.

Accordingly, in view of the observations and discussions made hereinabove, there is No. merit in this petition and the same is dismissed, so also the pending application(s), if any. No. costs.