Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2006 DIGILAW 381 (HP)

PARAS RAM v. STATE OF H. P.

2006-12-01

M.R.VERMA

body2006
JUDGEMENT M.R. Verma, J. (Retd.) Chairman:- The applicant herein has claimed the relief that the office order dated May 31, 2005 whereby he has been transferred from Store Baner to National Highway Pandon may be quashed and set aside and his salary from October 2003 to December 2003 may be directed to be release with interest. 2. The case of the applicant is that he is working as a work charged Beldar with the respondents since 1994. In 1996 he was given job of Chowkidar and was later permanently shifted for the job of Chowkidar in H.P.P. W.D. Store at Baner by issuing a separate Attendance register from January 1, 1996 and since then he is working as such. The applicant is also President of All Himachal Pradesh P.W.D. & I & PH Workers Union affiliated to INTUC of Distt. Bilaspur and is also Vice President of the State. Since the activities of the Union and the Organization of workers have created dissatisfaction in the minds of the Political Leaders of the government particularly because of raising of various instances of misappropriation, embezzlement and corruption against some departmental officers by the applicant therefore, the political leaders of the ruling party are bent upon to harass the applicant. As a consequence the applicant was subjected to various harassment by respondent 3 and 4 and was shifted from Store Baner. Apart from wrongly showing him absent and calling of his explanation his salary for October 2003 to January 2003 has been stopped. The shifting of the applicant from Store Baner to National Highway Pandon, Division is also out of Circle. Thus according to the applicant the impugned transfer is mala-fide, illegal, arbitrary and unconstrained, hence liable to be quashed. 3. The respondents filed reply raising the preliminary objection that this application is not maintainable in the present form and the applicant has no cause of action on merits it has been claimed that the applicant is a work charged Beldar. However, in the exigency of service in 1996 he was offered the work of Chowkidar in Baner Section but his engagement continued to be that of work charged Beldar the pay scales of work charged Beldar and work charged Chowkidar are similar but nature of their duties is different. However on sanction of post of Beldars and Chowkidars in 2003 one Jagdish was posted as a regular Chowkidar. However on sanction of post of Beldars and Chowkidars in 2003 one Jagdish was posted as a regular Chowkidar. Thereafter there was no justification to continue the temporary engagement of the applicant as Chowkidar. The applicant was therefore, directed in October 2003 to revert back to his original post i.e. work charged Beldar by the junior Engineer as also by the Assistant Engineer Swarghat. However, the applicant who is a shirker to perform physical work evaded the directions and failed to report for work whereupon he was served with show cause notice thereafter with a charge sheet. Since the applicant did not report for work during the period October 2003 to May 2004, therefore, his wages for that period has been withheld. 4 About relieving of the applicant by the impugned order it has been averred that the State Government took a decision that w.e.f. April 1. 2004 the National Highway Wing of the respondents shall function independently as independent Sub Division, Division and Circle with a separate Chief Engineer. The applicant who was earlier working in HPPWD Bilaspure Division No. 11 Swarghat Sub Division Baner and workers of various other categories who were working in National Highway No. 21 whose jurisdiction fell under National Highway Division Pandoh were shifted to National Highway Division Pandoh were shifted to National Highway Division Pandoh on May 29, 2004.As a consequence on May 31,2004 the Asstt. Engineer Swarghat Sub Division issued the impugned order and relieved the workers including the applicant on the same day. The applicant pursuant to these orders joined in HPPWD National Highway Sub Division Bilaspur. It is also case of the applicant that the shifting of the labourers from one wing to another has been effected because of the bifurcation of National Highway wing but there is no change of place of working. 5. I have heard the learned counsel for the applicant and respondent No.4 and Deputy Advocate General for respondents 1 and 2. 6. The sum of substance of the allegations of the applicant has already been set out hereinabove. He has attributed the impugned transfer to the "dissatisfaction in the minds of political leaders in to be government" because of raising various instances of misappropriation embezzlement and corruption against some officers by the applicant. 6. The sum of substance of the allegations of the applicant has already been set out hereinabove. He has attributed the impugned transfer to the "dissatisfaction in the minds of political leaders in to be government" because of raising various instances of misappropriation embezzlement and corruption against some officers by the applicant. The reason apparently does not seem to be probable for the simple reasons that the applicant has not specified as to against which officer of the department he had raised the instances of mis-appropriation and embezzlement etc, and even if so why the political leaders must get dis-satisfied with such action of the applicant. This allegation is highly cryptic without specifying the persons against whom the allegations are made or the persons in politics who felt offended by the acts of the applicant. It is easy to make such allegations, therefore, cannot be taken into the account unless supported by material. The allegations made by the applicant are not supported by any material, therefore, remains unsubstantiated and unreliable. 7. The applicant has also alleged that he has been subjected to various harassment by respondents No.3 and 4 but no specific instance of such harassment has been cited except that his explanation was called and he has been charge sheeted. In the present original application he has neither assailed such actions nor claimed any relief against such action. In these circumstances the alleged allegations of harassment which are claimed by the respondents to be the action because of conduct of the applicant, cannot be made basis for granting the relief claimed by the applicant in this original application. 8. It may be pointed out that on a bare perusal of Annexure A-1 it is clear that the applicant alongwith 25 other workers had been relieved from Swarghat, HPPWD Sub Division, with directions to report for duty to Assistant Engineer, Bilaspur Sub Division No.3, HPPWD Bilaspur as a consequence of transfer of Control of National Highway-21, Chandigarh, Mandi, Manali road (Kilometers 82/0 to 127/0) to National High Way Division, HPPWD Pandoh, but has been directed to report for duty within the same District in which such workers including the applicant were working at the time of relieving. The transfer of the Control as aforesaid cannot be said to be an action actuated by mala-fide and intended to harass the applicant as this decision had been taken by the government and not respondents 3 and 4, therefore, the impugned order cannot be said to be suffering from the vice of mala-fide. Thus, on the basis of the material placed on record it cannot be said that the impugned relieving of the applicant is mala-fide, illegal, arbitrary or un-constitutional. 9. In so far as the stopping of the salary of the applicant for the period October 2003 to Decembers 2003 is concerned the plea of the respondents is that during the relevant period the applicant did not report for duty and has been charge sheeted. The applicant has not claimed any relief in this original application about the departmental proceedings so initiated against him. It is not his established case that in fact he was not absent from duty or his absence period has been regularised as per the Rules or he has been exonerated of the charge of absence from duty. He is, therefore, not entitled to this relief. 10. In view of the above conclusions this original application is devoid of any merit and is accordingly dismissed.