Disposed

Rajni Bala v. State of Hp and Ors.

Himachal Pradesh HC5 Mar 2022CWP/1210/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This petition challenged an office order excluding the petitioner from promotion and her subsequent posting, as another employee had already been posted to the same school. The court directed the Department to allocate a post within ten days.

What did the court decide?

Directed the Respondent Department to provide a place of posting to the petitioner within ten days; she is deemed on duty in the meantime.

Rajni Bala Vs State of Hp and Ors. — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Himachal Pradesh HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA

¶2

ON THE 5^th DAY OF MARCH, 2022

¶3

BEFORE

¶4

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD RAFIQ,

¶5

CHIEF JUSTICE

¶6

¶7

HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTSNA REWAL DUA

¶8

CIVIL WRIT PETITION No. 1210 of 2022

¶9

Between:-

¶10

SMT. RAJNI BALA, W/O SH. DESH RAJ THAKUR, AGED 54 YEARS, R/O HOUSE NO. 222-223, NEW NALAGARH, PHASE-I, DISTRICT SOLAN, HIMACHAL PRADESH. PRESENTLY WORKING AS HEADMISTRESS IN GOVERNMENT HIGH SCHOOL BILNAWALI, DISTRICT SOLAN, HIMACHAL PRADESH.

¶11

…...PETITIONER

¶12

(BY MR. ONKAR JAIRATH, ADVOCATE)

¶13

AND

¶14

1. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH THROUGH ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY (EDUCATION) TO THE GOVT. OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA-2

¶15

2. THE DIRECTOR OF HIGHER EDUCATION, HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA-1

¶16

3. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF HIGHER EDUCATION, SOLAN, DISTRICT SOLAN, HIMACHAL PRADESH.

¶17

- 2 -

¶18

4. SH.RAM SAWROOP, S/O NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER, PRESENTLY WORKING AS HEADMASTER AT GOVERNMENT HIGH SCHOOL BILNAWALI, DISTRICT SOLAN, HIMACHAL PRADESH.

¶19

…...RESPONDENTS

¶20

(MS. RITTA GOSWAMI, ADDITIONAL ADVOCATE GENERAL, FOR RESPONDENTS NO.1 TO 3)

¶21

This writ petition coming on for admission this day,

¶22

Hon’ble Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua, passed the following:

¶23

O R D E R

¶24

This petition has been filed for the following prayers: -

¶25

“A. That a writ in the nature of Certiorari or any other appropriate writ order or directions may kindly be issued and the Impugned Office Order dated 13.01.2022 (Annexure P-5) may be quashed and set aside.

¶26

B. That a writ in the nature of Certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction may kindly be issued quashing and setting aside the Office Order dated 23.02.2022 to the extent that it confers notional benefits upon the Petitioner from the due date.

¶27

C. That a writ in the nature of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction may kindly be issued and the Respondent Department may be directed to promote the Petitioner from the due date, i.e. 03.12.2021 with all actual financial and other benefits.

¶28

- 3 -

¶29

D. That a writ in the nature of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction may kindly be issued and the Respondent Department may be directed to allow the Petitioner to discharge her duties at Government High School Bilnawali, District Solan, Himachal Pradesh in terms of order dated 23.02.2022.”

¶30

During hearing of the case, learned counsel for the petitioner confined his submissions only for challenging the office order dated 13.01.2022 (Annexure P-5) and we have accordingly heard the learned counsel for the parties.

¶31

The case of the petitioner is that she was appointed as

¶32

Trained Graduate Teacher (TGT) in the respondent-Department in June 1996. Two channels of promotions are available from the post of TGT i.e. (i) to the post of Lecturer and (ii) to the post of Headmaster. The petitioner, in accordance with law, exercised her option for promotion to the post of Headmaster. Vide office order dated 03.12.2021, the respondent-Department promoted 277 counterparts of the petitioner to the post of Headmaster, but her name was left out for no fault on her part.

¶33

The petitioner represented to respondent No.2 on 04.12.2021, highlighting her grievances with the prayer that she has been wrongly and illegally left out from promotion to the post of Headmaster. The respondent-Department realized its mistake and vide office order dated 23.02.2022, promoted her to the post of

¶34

- 4 -

¶35

Headmaster on notional basis w.e.f. 03.12.2021 and on actual basis from the date of joining.

¶36

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that vide order dated 23.02.2022, on account of her promotion as Headmaster, the petitioner was transferred from GSSS Moolkoti (Sml) to GHS Bilnawali (Sln).

¶37

The grievance of the petitioner is that one Shri Ram Swaroop has already been posted at GHS Bilnawali, District Solan vide office order dated 13.01.2022 (Annexure P-5). It has been further highlighted that though in compliance to order dated 23.02.2022, the petitioner had joined her duties at GHS Bilnawali, District Solan on 25.02.2022, however above named Shri Ram Swaroop had already been ordered to be posted at the said school vide office order dated 13.01.2022. Therefore, the petitioner is presently without any effective place of posting.

¶38

In the facts and circumstances of the case, having regard to the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, we dispose of this writ petition by directing respondent No.2- the Director Higher Education, Himachal Pradesh, to give a place of posting to the petitioner subsequent to her promotion vide office order dated 23.02.2022 in accordance with law and applicable transfer policy. This exercise be done within ten days from today. Till

¶39

- 5 -

¶40

the petitioner is allocated a place of posting in terms of the order to be passed by respondent No.2, she shall be deemed to be on duty.

¶41

The pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also

¶42

stand disposed of.

¶43

( Mohammad Rafiq )

¶44

Chief Justice

¶45

( Jyotsna Rewal Dua ) March 05, 2022 Judge R. Atal

Rajni Bala v. State of Hp and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajni Bala v. State of Hp and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Suresha Nand Vs State of Hp and Ors.

Sukhdev Vs State of Hp and Ors.

Chander Shekhar Vs State of Hp and Ors.

Babu Ram Vs State of Hp and Others

M/S Naina Devi Traders Vs Municipal Council

Nazakat Ali Hashmi Vs State of Hp and Ors.