Sirtaj Singh Rangar vs State of Uttarakhand and others

Petitioner is the appellant. The writ petition was filed challenging the order dated 16.11.2016 passed by the third respondent. By the impugned order, the petitioner, who was working as a Labour Enforcement Officer at Tehri, has been transferred as Labour Enforcement Officer, Pithoragarh with additional charge of District Bageshwar. The claim of the appellant before the learned Single Judge was that he is having disability of 40 per cent. He relied on the order dated 17.01.2011, in which, according to him, it has been stated that for the persons working in Class C and D, who are disabled, endeavour should be made as far as possible that they should be transferred to their home district or sugam place in their place of posting, promotion and annual transfer and they should be transferred to the desired place on the basis of their option. The learned Single Judge dismissed the writ petition. In the impugned order, he notes that the appellant was appointed against the general category as Labour Enforcement Officer, though the appellant relied on the Medical Certificate, whereby his disability has been assessed at 40 per cent. He further noted that since the appellant was not appointed against the disability category, prima facie, he has no case to be transferred to Pithoragarh, and the writ petition was dismissed.

We heard Mr. V.D. Bisen, learned counsel for the appellant and Mr. C.S. Rawat, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State of Uttarakhand / respondent nos. 1 to 3.

There is no case of mala fide. There is also no case of violation of any statute. However, the appellant claims the benefit of a policy. We would only dispose of the Appeal by permitting him to represent his grievance regarding the transfer being not in conformity with the policy before respondent no. 2. Accordingly, the Appeal is partly allowed by directing that if the appellant represents his grievance before the second respondent within a period of one week from today, the second respondent will consider and take a decision on the same in accordance with law within a further period of two weeks from the date of receipt of the representation along with a certified copy of this judgment. The decision will be taken by the second respondent untrammeled by any finding in the judgment of the learned Single Judge.