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
5 paragraphs · 212 wordsThe petitioner, who is working as a Lecturer in History in Government Senior Secondary School, Batran, District Hamirpur, H.P., and was transferred vide order dated 12.6.2020, which order the respondents rescinded vide order dated 15.6.2020, has come up before this Court seeking cancellation of the order of rescinding of the transfer without any reasons.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner and one Praveen Kumar got themselves transferred on mutual basis.
Learned Advocate General submits that this transfer order was not given effect, as such no right has been bestowed with the petitioner.
This transfer was cancelled vide order dated 15.6.2020, Annexure P-4, which is silent about the reasons for which it was cancelled. Once the petitioner has been transferred vide order dated 12.6.2020, after that in case the respondents wanted to cancel it, then they should have explained the reasons before passing any rescinding order. The previous order was passed by the prior approval of the competent authority whereas it is not the case with Annexure P-4. This is another reason to interfere with the impugned order.
Given above, this writ petition is allowed and order dated 15.6.2020, Annexure P-4, is quashed and set aside. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stands disposed of.
