Chhattisgarh Rajya Sahkari Computer Operator Sangh v. State Of Chhattisgarh
NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 5370 of 2020 1.
Chhattisgarh Rajya Sahkari Computer Operator Sangh District Balodabazar (C. G.) Through Its President Mohan Prasad Dahariya, S/o Shri Bhagchand Dahariya, Aged About 35 Years, R/o Village Karda, P.O. Marda, District Balodabazar- Bhatapara Chhattisgarh 2.
Manoj Verma S/o Shri Arjunlal Verma Aged About 45 Years VicePresident Of Chhattisgarh Rajha Sahkari Computer Operator Sangh, District Balodabazar(C.G.) R/o Village And Post Risda, District Balodabazar- Bhatapara Chhattisgarh 3.
Sandeep Yadav S/o Shri Ashok Yadav Aged About 40 Years Executive Member Of Chhattisgarh Rajya Sahkari Computer Operator Sangh District Balodabazar (C.G.), R/o Village And Post Hathbandh, District Balodabazar- Bhatapara Chhattisgarh 4.
Shashi Verma S/o Shri Pardeshiram Verma Aged About 42 Years Executive Member Of Chhattisgarh Rajya Sahkari Computer Operator Sangh District Balodabazar (C.G.), R/o Village And Post Nawapara, District Balodabazar- Bhatapara Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioners
Versus
1.
State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary Food Civil Supplies And Consumer Protection Department, Mantralaya, Indrawati Bhawan, Naya Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2.
Director, Food Civil Supplies And Consumer Protection Department, Indrawati Bhawan, Naya Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh 3.
Registrar Co- Operative Societies Chhattisgarh Indrawati Bhawan, Naya Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh 4.
Joint Registrar Co-Operative Societies Chhattisgarh, Raipur,division Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh 5.
Collector District Balodabazar- Bhatapara, Chhattisgarh ---- Respondents For Petitioners :
Ms. Meena Shashtri, Advocate For State :
Mr. Jitendra Pali, Dy. A.G.
Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board
17/12/2020 1.
The challenge in the present writ petition is to an order of transfer dated 28.11.2020 passed by the Joint Collector on behalf of the Collector, District Balodabazar-Bhatapara.
2.
The impugned order shows an order of transfer of around 151 employees working under different societies in the said District. 3.
At the outset, this Court is of the opinion that the writ petition would not be maintainable for the reason that the writ petition has been in the representative capacity on behalf of all the 151 persons, who have been transferred.
4.
It is settled position of law that the order of transfer of a employee from one place to another place is an individual cause of action, That for approaching the High Court under the writ jurisdiction it is only the aggrieved person against whom an order has been passed by the employer who could have filed the writ petition under the service jurisprudence.
5.
The writ petition challenging a transfer order cannot be filed by the union or the association, to which the employee is affiliated to. There is vast a difference for a trade union or an association, in raising a dispute under the Cooperative Societies Act or raising of a dispute under the Industrial Disputes Act, then approaching the High Court for the writ remedies which under the service jurisprudence would be available only to the persons, whose individual right has been infringed by the act on the part of the respondents. Moreover a union or an association can raise a petition seeking for a collective relief of for a collective demand but
cannot challenge an order of transfer issued against several person by way of a single writ petition that to in a representative capacity when the dispute being an individual cause of action. 6.
The writ petition therefore to the extent of it being in the representative capacity would not be maintainable. The person aggrieved would always be at liberty to approach the Court individually if they are so aggrieved by the action on the part of the respondents.
7.
The writ petition accordingly stands rejected. Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) Judge Ved