Sita Ram vs State Of H.P. & Ors

Ranjan Sharma, J

Notice. Mr. Rajan Kahol, learned Additional Advocate General waives notice for respondent No. 1. Mr. Shivam Sharma, Advocate, waives notice for respondents No. 2 to 4.

The petitioner has filed the instant petition, seeking the following reliefs:-

i) That writ in the nature of mandamus may very kindly be issued not to give effect to the impugned Officer Order dated 30.10.2023 (Annexure P-3) whereby the petitioner has been transferred from the post of Head Mechanic HRTC Rampur Unit to the post of Head Mechanic HRTC Karsog Unit and subsequent proceedings thereafter including relieving orders; and/or.

ii) That writ in the nature of certiorari may very kindly be issued quashing and setting-aside the impugned Officer Order dated 30.10.2023 (Annexure P-3) whereby the petitioner has been transferred from the post of Head Mechanic HRTC Rampur Unit to the post of Head Mechanic HRTC Karsog Unit and subsequent proceedings thereafter including relieving orders; and /or.

iii) That writ in nature of mandamus may kindly be issued to decide the representation (Annexure P-5) filed before the respondent department keeping in view the nature of treatment the petitioner is undergoing.

Petitioner was appointed as Junior Technician in HRTC Unit, Rohru on 01.01.1996 and he was promoted as Mechanic, in H.R.TC Unit, Rampur and was then promoted as Head Mechanic, on regular basis, on 07.02.2023, Annexure P-2, and in compliance thereof, he joined the promotional post of Head Mechanic, in Rampur Unit on 07.02.2023 itself.

Grievance of the petitioner is that though the petitioner has joined the promotional post of Head Mechanic, in Rampur Unit on 07.02.2023 yet, the Respondent-Corporation has issued another order on 30. 09.2023, Annexure P-3, transferring him from Rampur Unit to Karsog Unit.

Feeling aggrieved against the transfer orders dated 30.09.2023, the petitioner submits that he has made a representation to Respondent No.2-Managing Director Himachal Road Transport Corporation on 09.10.2023, Annexure P-5, indicating his grievances/hardships. A glance at the representation reveals that the petitioner has specifically mentioned that he is undergoing spine related treatment, in Neurology Department of Atal Institute of Medical Super Specialties Shimla, which is evident from the medical certificates, Annexure P-4 (Colly). In view of his ailment, he requested to post him either at HRTC Workshop Taradevi or HRTC Workshop Dhalli (District Shimla), so that he can avail expert medical advice and treatment from Atal Institution of Medical Super Specialties Shimla, which facilities are not available at Karsog.

Mr. Rajan Kahol, learned Additional Advocate General has vehemently opposed the petition, on the ground that the petitioner was promoted as Mechanic and thereafter as Head Mechanic and he remained posted at Rampur and he has rendered sufficiently long service at Rampur and thus liable to be transferred. The learned counsel for the Corporation has also opposed the petition on same analogy, as that of the learned State Counsel.

This contention, is without merit, for the reason, that the petitioner has come up with a clear cut case, stating therein that he does not intends to remain at Rampur, but keeping in view his medical exigencies, he may be considered for posting, in or around Shimla town so that he is in a position to seek expert medical advice and health care, as and when, required, in view of the fact that the petitioner is undergoing treatment at Atal Institute of Medical Super Specialties Shimla as per Annexure, P-4 (Colly).

Case file reveals that the representation dated 9. 10.2023, Annexure P-5, is still pending adjudication. It is trite law that in case, an employee is aggrieved against his transfer then, he shall point out his grievances, including hardships to the appointing-competent authority, who shall examine the same in accordance with law, as it is not the function of the Court(s) to assess the situation so as to address the grievances/hardships, except when, the non-redressal is vitiated by non-application of mind or is perverse or is based on extraneous considerations or suffers by ignoring the relevant aspects/factors based on existing norms and the applicable law.

Keeping in view, the entirety of the facts and circumstances, this Court directs the respondent No-2-Managing Director, HRTC, Shimla to decide the representation dated 09.10.2023, Annexure P-5, within three weeks from today and that too, after affording a personal hearing to the petitioner. This Court hopes and trusts that the Respondent No-2-Managing Director, HRTC, Shimla shall take a sympathetic view of the matter so as to ensure that the right to health of the petitioner, which is a fundamental right, under Article 21 of the Constitution of India, is adequately safeguarded, while deciding the representation.

Till the decision of the representation, the operation of the impugned orders dated 30.09.2023, Annexure P-3 is stayed, qua the petitioner, as the petitioner has not been relieved from the post of Head Mechanic in HRTC Unit Rampur, and the substitute has also not joined in its place.

The writ petition is disposed of, so also, the pending application(s), if any.