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
10 paragraphs · 269 wordsManoj Kumar Tiwari, J
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
Petitioner was transferred from Rudrapur to Ranikhet, against which he filed writ petition. The writ petition was disposed of with a direction to Chief General Manager, Uttarakhand Jal Sansthan, to take decision on petitioner’s representation.
In his representation, petitioner has invoked provisions contained in Uttarakhand Annual Transfer for Public Servants Act, 2017, for questioning the propriety of transfer order. Chief General Manager has rejected petitioner’s representation by holding that Uttarakhand Annual Transfer for Public Servants Act, 2017 is not applicable to the employees of Uttarakhand Jal Sansthan.
Petitioner had relied upon a Government Order dated 24.05.2021. The said Government Order also provides that it shall be applied to only such employees on whom Transfer Act, 2017 is applicable.
The only ground of challenge to the impugned order was based on Transfer Act. Petitioner’s counsel could not satisfy this Court that the Transfer Act is applicable to the petitioner.
In such view of the matter, this Court does not find any reason to interfere with the impugned order passed by Chief General Manager, Uttarakhand Jal Sansthan.
Accordingly, writ petition fails and is dismissed. No order as to costs.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has expressed an apprehension that petitioner will not be permitted to join at the transferred place. If that is so, petitioner shall be at liberty to submit his joining report at the transferred place, within three days. If petitioner submits joining report, the same shall be accepted.
Let a certified copy of this order be issued today itself.
