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 · 265 wordsTarlok Singh Chauhan, J
It is noted that the entire thrust of this petition relating to transfer, is based on personal hardship.
It is more than settled that this is a matter which is required to be considered by the respondents in terms of the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court rendered in Rajendra Roy vs. Union of India and another (1993),1 SCC 148, wherein it was observed as under:
"7..... The appellant has not made any representation about personal hardship to the department. As such, there was no occasion for the department to consider such representation. This appeal, therefore, fails and is dismissed, but we make no order as to costs. It is, however, made clear that the appellant will be free to make representation to the concerned department about personal hardship, if any, being suffered by the appellant in view of the impugned order. It is reasonable expected that if such representation is made, the same should be considered by the department as expeditiously as practicable."
Accordingly, the instant petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to consider the instant case as a representation and decide the same sympathetically, taking into consideration the adverse family circumstances of the petitioner.
We are informed that there is already a vacancy at Government Girls Senior Secondary School, Ghumarwin. In case it is so, the respondents may also consider posting of the petitioner in the said school, within a period of three weeks. Pending application(s), if any, stand(s) disposed of.
For compliance to come up for 4th May, 2021.
Copy dasti