Radha Krishan v. State Of Haryana And Another

CWP-3215-2018

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CWP-3215-2018 Date of Decision: February 12, 2018 Radha Krishan

...Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana and another

...Respondents

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN PALLI

Present:

Mr. Rakesh Nagpal, Advocate, for the petitioner.

ARUN PALLI, J. (ORAL) Notice of motion.

Mr. Siddharth Sanwaria, DAG, Haryana, present in the Court, accepts notice on behalf of the respondents. Copies furnished. For the nature of order, I propose to pass in the matter, no formal written statements/counter affidavits on behalf of the respondents are indeed necessary, at this stage. Thus, with the consent of the parties, the petition is being disposed of finally.

The petitioner is employed as Havaldar Clerk in the respondent department. Pursuant to the order dated 13.02.2014 (Annexure P-1), he was transferred from the office of the District Commandant, Home Guard, Panipat, to the office of the District Commandant, Home Guard, Fatehabad, vice Shri Rajender Prashad. He is aggrieved by an order dated 06.02.2018 (Annexure P-2), vide which he has been transferred to Kaithal. The limited grievance that the petitioner has is that he is slated to retire from service on 31.12.2018. And, Clause (iv) of the transfer policy, dated 06.10.2004 (Annexure P-3), postulates that transfer of a superannuating employee, who Prashant Kapoor 2018.02.12 17:40 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document

CWP-3215-2018 is in the last year of his service, may be effected only in compelling circumstances. It is urged that there is nothing on record to show that the transfer of the petitioner, in the given situation, to Kaithal, was inevitable or was ordered in extreme administrative exigencies. In response, learned State counsel submits that the grievance of the petitioner as also his claim shall be considered and dealt with by the respondent authorities within a period of eight weeks from today. And, appropriate orders, in accordance with law, shall be passed and communicated to the petitioner.

The petition is accordingly disposed of in the above terms. However, in the event the claim of the petitioner is declined, the respondent authorities shall pass a comprehensive order by assigning reasons in support thereof.

As the petitioner has still not been relieved from Fatehabad, the operation of the impugned order dated 06.02.2018 (Annexure P-2), shall remain stayed till appropriate orders are passed by the respondents. (ARUN PALLI) JUDGE February 12, 2018 Pkapoor Whether Speaking/Reasoned:

YES / NO Whether Reportable:

YES / NO Prashant Kapoor 2018.02.12 17:40 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document