AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Tarlok Singh Chauhan, J
Notice. Shiv Pal Manhans, learned Additional Advocate General, appears and waives service of notice on behalf of respondents No. 1 and 2.
Aggrieved by the impugned transfer order dated 12.11.2021, the petitioner has filed the instant petition for grant of the following reliefs:
"That the transfer order Annexure P1 dated 12.11.2021 issued by respondent No.2 may very kindly be quashed and set aside qua the petitioner.
OR
The petitioner may very kindly ordered to be adjusted at a nearby place enabling her to take care of the husband and her mother in law."
A perusal of the petition shows that save and except for the individual hardship, no other factual and legal grounds have been taken by the petitioner in this petition to assail the impugned transfer order dated 12.11.2021.
It is more than settled that the courts are extremely slow in directly interfering in the personal hardship cases. The clear implication of the almost consistent directions given in the cases is that the transferee could make a representation to the competent authority. Reference in this regard can conveniently be made to the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Rajendra Roy vs Union Of India and anr. (1993) 1 SCC 148.
Accordingly, the instant petition is disposed of by permitting the petitioner to make a representation, which if made, within a period of one week from today, shall be considered and decided by the respondents within next two weeks thereafter. Till such decision is made by the respondents upon the representation of the petitioner, the petitioner shall not be compelled to join the transferred station. Pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed of.