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
5 paragraphs · 253 wordsA.A. Sayed, CJ
The petitioner is aggrieved by the order of transfer dated 14th October, 2022, whereby he has been transferred from Tipper (Hamirpur) to Sural (Pangi) (Chamba). Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that Sural (Pangi) (Chamba) is a difficult/tribal/hard area. It is submitted that the petitioner is due to retire in January 2024 and under Clause 12.1 of the Transfer Policy, which inter alia, states that an employee who has less than 5 years to superannuate would not be transferred to remote/tribal/difficult area.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is suffering from diseases whereby he cannot serve in high altitude areas and a medical certificate to that effect has been annexed as Annexure P-2 (Page-19). Learned counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner made a representation, which has not been accepted by the respondents.
In the facts and circumstances, we dispose of the writ petition by permitting the petitioner to make a fresh representation to respondent No.1-Principal Secretary( Education) to the Government of H.P. within one week from today. If such representation is made, the same shall be decided by respondent No.1 not later than two weeks from the date of receipt of the representation. We make it clear that the petitioner shall not be compelled to join at the proposed place of transfer till his representation is decided. It will be open for the petitioner to proceed on leave, if so adviced.
The pending application(s), if any, also to stand disposed of.