Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2021 DIGILAW 414 (HP)

Roop Singh v. Hpsebl & Ors.

2021-07-16

SATYEN VAIDYA, TARLOK SINGH CHAUHAN

body2021
JUDGMENT Tarlok Singh Chauhan, J. - How employees having links with someone influential in corridors of power, can obtain favourable order of transfer, is best reflected in the instant case. 2. The genesis of this case is an earlier petition i.e. CWP No. 2300 of 2020 filed by the third respondent with a very innocuous prayer, which reads as under:- "(i) That the impugned transfer order dated 08.07.2020 may kindly be quashed and set aside and the petitioner may kindly be allowed to continue at the present place of posting in the interest of justice and fair play." 3. This petition was disposed of by this Court vide order dated 10.07.2020, the relevant portion whereof reads as under:- 2. The petitioner is to retire shortly and as such, his transfer is protected under Clause 8.5 of the Transfer Policy. This is a matter, which is required to be considered by the respondents. 3. Accordingly, the present petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner under Clause 8.5 of the Transfer Policy and take a decision within a period of four weeks from today. Pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of. 4. In the meanwhile, in case the petitioner has not been relieved, he shall not be relieved and if relieved, no coercive action be taken to compel him to join at the transferred station. 5.For compliance, list on 07.08.2020. 4. In compliance to the aforesaid direction, the third respondent filed a representation wherein it was categorically stated that he may be adjusted against the vacant post at Electrical System Sub Division Bijni (Electrical System Sub Division Ratti) District Mandi. 5. The official respondents acceded to the request of the third respondent by transferring him from Electrical Division Thalout to Electrical System Sub Division Bijni (Electrical System Sub Division Ratti) District Mandi. 6. As noticed above, the specific case of the third respondent in his representation was that he may be adjusted at Thalout against vacancy and, therefore, the necessary corollary was that if there was no vacancy, obviously, then the request of the third respondent could not have been entertained much less acceded to that too on the pretext that this was the mandate of Court, as this Court had not issued any direction to this effect. 7. 7. It would be noticed that it was on account of adverse family circumstances of the petitioner that he had been posted at Thalout because the mother of the petitioner was seriously ill as she had been operated for brain tumour and there was none in the family to look after his mother because his brother was serving in Army. Moreover, the petitioner had barely completed one year and four months at 132/33 KV Sub Station Ratti, when he had again been transferred to Electrical Division Thalout. Therefore, in such circumstances, it is evidently clear that the transfer had been effected only to illegally accommodate and oblige the third respondent. 8. It is rather unfortunate that employees who can pull strings in the power corridors at the higher and lower level successfully manage their postings and transfers to the stations of their choice by trampling over the rights of other eligible persons. 9. This practice deserves to be not only deprecated in the strongest words but needs to be discouraged and stopped forthwith. 10. In view of the aforesaid discussion, we find merit in this petition and the same is accordingly allowed and the office order dated 17.07.2020 (Annexure P-3) is accordingly quashed and set aside. The petitioner is permitted to continue serving at his present place of posting at 133/33 KV S/Stn Ratti under Elect. System Divn. Bijni Mandi and the third respondent is directed to be transferred to Electrical Division Thalout. 11. Before parting, it needs to be observed that the respondents being State within the meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution is no ordinary party trying to win a case against one of its own citizens by hook and crook; for the State's interest is to meet honest claims, vindicate a substantial defence and never to score a technical point or over-reach a weaker party to avoid a just liability or secure an unfair advantage, simply because legal devices provide such an opportunity. Being a State it is a virtuous litigant and looks with unconcern on immoral forensic success. 12. The petition is disposed of in the aforesaid terms, so also pending applications, if any. Parties are left to bear their own costs.