Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2019 DIGILAW 1898 (HP)

Ajay Singh v. State Of H P

2019-12-11

ANOOP CHITKARA, DHARAM CHAND CHAUDHARY

body2019
JUDGMENT Dharam Chand Chaudhary, J. - The petitioner is working as Deputy Ranger and presently posted as such in Sadwan Block, Pragpur Beat, Dehra Division, District Kangra, H.P. He has now been ordered to be transferred to Khaniara Block, Dharamshala Range of Dharamshala Forest Division, District Kangra, H.P. 2. The complaint is that the petitioner has been transferred at the behest of respondent No.5, the local MLA (Industries Minister, Himachal Pradesh) as he did not succumb to the pressure of the said respondent, who wanted to hush up the matter pertaining to illicit felling in his area i.e. Sadwan Block, Dehra Range in Forest Division Dehra and to the contrary prepared a damage report against the culprits involved in illicit felling of trees and as a result thereof recovered a sum of Rs.69,850/- and Rs.34,185/- by way of damage and got the same deposited in Government treasury. Besides the matter was also reported to the higher authorities. As per further case of the petitioner, it is in view of he having taken action against the culprit, allegedly a contractor, who had cut trees from Government Forest while constructing the road, he has been transferred under political pressure well before the completion of his normal tenure at Sadwan Block, on the basis of a D.O. note. It is keeping in view such averments, following order came to be passed in this writ petition on 21.11.2019:- " Reply though stands filed, however, in order to appreciate the controversy between the parties, the perusal of the record leading to the transfer of the petitioner is required. Respondent No.2, is therefore, directed to produce the record of this case on the next date. List on 11.12.2019. " 3. Consequently, learned Deputy Advocate General has produced the record. The averments in the writ petition that the petitioner has been transferred on D.O. note find support from the records as it is the office of the Chief Minister who has recommended his transfer from the present place of posting by way of such note. True it is that the petitioner is also recipient of a D.O. Note at the time of his transfer and posting at Sadwan Block under Dehra Forest Division. True it is that the petitioner is also recipient of a D.O. Note at the time of his transfer and posting at Sadwan Block under Dehra Forest Division. However, at this occasion he seems to be transferred at the instance of respondent No.5 as no explanation is forthcoming in the reply to the allegations in the writ petition that the said respondent initially pressurized the petitioner to hush up the matter pertaining to illicit felling and when he had not succumbed to any such pressure and to the contrary issued a damage report and imposed penalty of Rs.69850/- and Rs.34,185/-, against the persons indulged in illicit felling, the said respondent by misusing his position being local MLA has managed the transfer of the petitioner on the basis of D.O. Note. Had there been no influence/pressure of respondent No.5, who happens to be a Cabinet Minister, in the transfer of the petitioner, why respondents No.1 to 4 have not stated so in the reply they filed to the writ petition. The transfer of the petitioner as such is not a routine matter but the result of colourable exercise of power. 4. On the other hand, the D.O. Note dated 24.7.2019, on the basis whereof, the petitioner has been transferred, available in the record produced before us, makes it crystal clear that the office of Hon''ble Chief Minister has approved the transfer of the petitioner out of Dehra Forest Division, without mentioning the name of station therein. The tone and tenor of the D.O. Note itself demonstrates that the petitioner has been transferred by way of penalty or at the behest of local politician and not in the interest of administration. Joining his duties by the petitioner at the transferred station, in the circumstances discussed hereinabove, does not legalize the transfer of the petitioner from Sadwan Block, Dehra Division to Khaniara Block, Dharamshala Range of Dharamshala Forest Division, District Kangra, H.P. 5. Joining his duties by the petitioner at the transferred station, in the circumstances discussed hereinabove, does not legalize the transfer of the petitioner from Sadwan Block, Dehra Division to Khaniara Block, Dharamshala Range of Dharamshala Forest Division, District Kangra, H.P. 5. True it is that this Court in Sanjay Kumar vs. State of Himachal Pradesh and others, (2013) 3 ShimLC 1373 and also Amir Chand vs. State of Himachal Pradesh,2013 2 HimLR 648 and in its recent judgment rendered in CWP No.2490 of 2019, titled Dalip Singh versus State of H.P. and Others has held that the Chief Minister and Ministers/ elected representatives may recommend the transfer of an employee, however, the transfer order has ultimately to be issued by the Administrative Head on application of mind and uninfluenced by the recommendations so made by the elected representative. In the case in hand, the competent authority, respondent No.2 has not examined the desirability of the transfer of the petitioner in terms of the transfer policy and also as to whether his transfer would be in the larger public interest and rather transferred the petitioner from his present place of posting, merely on the basis of recommendations made by political executive. The impugned order, as such, is not legally sustainable. The same is accordingly set aside, leaving it open to the respondents to transfer the petitioner, if required, in accordance with law and also the transfer policy. 4. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of, so also the pending application(s), if any.