Satish Kumar vs State of H.P. and Others

Deepak Gupta, J.—This petition is directed against the order dated 29.5.2010 whereby the Petitioner has been transferred from Padhar Division, District Mandi to Kumarsain Division and in his place Naveen Sharma who was posted in Nirmand Division has been transferred to Padhar Division.

The State in its reply has given a chart showing the places of posting of both the Petitioner and private Respondent No. 4. It is apparent that the Petitioner has served at various places and was posted at Mandi in May, 2007. He worked there and in April, 2010 this Division was shifted to Padhar. Thereafter this order was passed and he was transferred to Kumarsain. On the other hand Respondent No. 4 served in Mandi and Bilaspur Divisions and was posted at Nirmand Division on 25.9.2006. He has spent about 4 years in Nirmand Division alone and then he was brought to Padhar Division.

Mr. Palsra urges that Petitioner has spent less time at Mandi Division as compared to the Respondent No. 4 and should have been retained at Mandi. This Court in writ proceedings cannot sit over the administrative orders of the State unless they are totally arbitrary or illegal. The Respondent No. 4 has spent 4 years at Nirmand Division and has been now sent to Padhar Division, whereas the Petitioner has been transferred out of Mandi after completing his normal tenure. Such an order calls for no interference in writ proceedings and the writ petition is accordingly dismissed. No costs.