Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2011 DIGILAW 1534 (HP)

O. C. Saklani v. State of Himachal Pradesh

2011-03-21

V.K.SHARMA

body2011
JUDGMENT V.K. Sharma, Judge The petition has been filed on the following prayers vide para 11 (a) and (b) : “ (a) to issue a writ of certiorari or direction in nature thereof, quashing the impugned order dated 6.9.2010 being Annexure P-1 of the writ petition, as unconstitutional and illegal and contrary to the law. (b) to issue a writ of mandamus, appropriate writ, order or direction in nature thereof, directing the respondent to allow the petitioner to complete normal tenure of 3 to 5 years at present place of posting.” 2. In reply, the respondent has taken the following stand vide para 1 of the preliminary submissions : “That it is respectfully submitted that the post of Lecturer (Political Science) was vacant at Govt. College Pangi, District Chamba since 2007 i.e. opening of the College and study of students were suffering. There was also shortage of staff at Govt. College Pangi. The petitioner was transferred from Govt. College Nadaun to Govt. College Pangi (Killar), District Chamba vide notification No. EDN-A (B)-6-4/2010 dated 6.9.2010 on administrative grounds with TTA/JT. The previous postings of the petitioner are as under :- Sr. No. Name of the Institution From To 1. Government College, Karsog, District Mandi January, 1996 24.7.1998. 2. Government College, Hamirpur 24.7.1998 23.12.2004 3. Government College, Una 24.12.2004 26.6.2007 4. Government College, Hamipur 27.6.2007 2.6.2010 5. Govt. College Nadaun, Hamirpur 3.6.2010 Continue. The above mentioned table shows that the petitioner during his service career mostly remained in District Hamirpur at the stations of his choice. The transfer policy of the Government envisages that no Government employee can claim his transfer or posting as a matter of right. It will be the prerogative of the State Government to post/transfer any employee anywhere in the State keeping in view the administrative convenience 3. In view of the above reply, the petition is disposed of with the direction to the respondent that subject to the petitioner making a representation along with a copy of this judgment within one month from today, the same shall be considered and decided by the said respondent within another month thereafter in accordance with law, after affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner, if so, desired. Interim order dated 15.9.2010 shall continue till final disposal of the representation. 4. The petition stands disposed of, so also pending CMP (s), if any.