Bhogi Ram v. Punjab & Haryana High Court




    
     Date of Decision: 03.12.2018 Bhogi Ram .....Appellant versus Punjab and Haryana High Court through its Registrar General .....Respondent  !  "  #
$
#


%
  #
    "  #


 
%  Present :

Mr. Sanjeev Sharma, Advocate, for the appellant. **** $
#


%
  #
 &'(  )**  Heard. For the reasons mentioned in the application, which is duly accompanied by an affidavit, the same is allowed. Order dated 10.10.2018 is recalled and the appeal is ordered to be restored at its original number.

+)* ,)*-  Heard. For the reasons mentioned in the applications, delay of 9 days in filing and 195 days in re0filing the appeal is condoned.    Aggrieved by the order dated 16.01.2018 passed by the learned Single Judge dismissing the writ petition, this intra court appeal under Clause X of the Letters Patent has been filed by the appellant0petitioner. 2.

The appellant0petitioner, who was an Assistant in the subordinate Court, while posted at Faridabad Sessions Division, disciplinary proceedings were initiated against him. Subsequently, he was transferred to Sessions Division, Bhiwani. A representation was made seeking stay of his

 
 transfer on the ground that disciplinary proceedings are pending which was placed before a committee of Hon'ble Judges who after considering the entire matter passed the following resolution:0




           

 





     



 



     

       

         !

  "    #$ %        

  

 &  

 !

  "   

'

         !

  "    "

  ( !

  )$     ''  $ 

  #$ %     * $ '% '%

  *         

   %   

#$

  $ %     '     #$ %      +     

 

            



   ,    

   #$





  '

 



-



.  ' /  3.

The decision taken by the Committee duly approved by the Chief Justice was communicated to the appellant by the Registrar General vide letter which has been impugned in the writ petition. Learned Single Judge dismissed the writ petition holding that in case his services during the pendency of the disciplinary proceedings were transferred from one District to another in view of the resolution passed by the Committee, the disciplinary proceedings have also been transferred to the said district and there seems to be no infirmity in the same. We are also of the considered view that this matter is not such which may require interference by us. No prejudice would be caused to the appellant0petitioner by transferring the disciplinary proceedings to the district where his services have been transferred.

  4.

In view of the above, there is no reason or occasion to interfere in the impugned order passed by the learned Single Judge. The appeal accordingly fails and stands dismissed.

  



               



 !"

  Whether speaking/reasoned √Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No√