Disposed

Kedar Nath v. State of H P and Another

Himachal Pradesh HC18 Sept 2023CWP/6564/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment disposes of a writ petition challenging an office order transferring a school lecturer. The court permitted the petitioner to submit a fresh representation for station adjustment within one week, directing authorities to decide within two weeks. The petitioner is not compellable to join the new station pending a reply.

What did the court decide?

Permission granted to petitioner to make a fresh representation for adjustment; authority directed to decide within two weeks; join new station stayed pending reply.

Kedar Nath Vs State of H P and… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Himachal Pradesh HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA

¶2

CWP No.6564 of 2023 Decided on: 18^th September, 2023 _________________________________________________________________ Kedar Nath ....Petitioner Versus State of H.P. & Ors …Respondents ________________________________________________________________ Coram_

¶3

Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua

¶4

1 Whether approved for reporting?

¶5

_________________________________________________________________ For the petitioner: Mr. Vijay Chaudhary, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General with Ms. Seema Sharma, Mr. Sumit Sharma and Mr. Rohit Sharma, Deputy Advocates General.

¶6

Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge

¶7

Notice. Mr. Sumit Sharma, learned Deputy

¶8

Advocate General, appears and waives service of notice on behalf of the respondents.

¶9

2. Heard.

¶10

3. The petitioner is serving as Lecturer (School New) (Hindi), at GSSS Purthi, Pangi, District Chamba, H.P.. His grievance is to the office order dated 31.07.2023 (Annexure

¶11

1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes

¶12

¶13

P-2), which transfers him to GSSS Paroian, District Una, H.P.

¶14

4. The transfer has been assailed by the petitioner primarily on the grounds that the same has been ordered on the basis of a D.O note and second contention raised is that Clause 16 of the Comprehensive Guiding Principles, 2013 has not been adhered to inasmuch the petitioner has not been given option of choosing five stations of his choice for his adjustment. To a query of the Court, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner was posted in his present place of posting in the year 1994 and as such, has completed about thirty years’ tenure there.

¶15

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that

¶16

the petitioner would be content in case in view of Clause 16 of the Policy, he is permitted to make a fresh representation to respondent No.2 /competent authority seeking his adjustment, whereafter competent authority be directed to decide the same within a fixed time schedule. Learned Deputy Advocate General is not averse to this prayer.

¶17

6. In view of the above submissions, this writ petition is disposed of by permitting the petitioner to make a

¶18

¶19

representation to respondent No.2/competent authority within one week from today, which shall be considered and decided by respondent No.2/competent authority in accordance with law and applicable policy, within a period of two weeks thereafter. The decision so arrived at shall also be communicated to the petitioner. Till such time, the petitioner shall not be compelled to join at the transferred station and he may avail leave of the kind due. However, the protection available to the petitioner in this order shall stand automatically vacated, in case the representation is not preferred by him within the indicated time line.

¶20

Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also

¶21

to stand disposed of.

¶22

Jyotsna Rewal Dua Judge

¶23

September 18, 2023 R.Atal

Kedar Nath v. State of H P and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kedar Nath v. State of H P and Another

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

Virender Singh Vs State of Hp and Others

Jagdish Chand Vs Hpseb

Mangal Singh Bagga Vs Hpseb

Ram Singh Vs State of Hp and Others

Gian Chand Vs State of Hp and Others

Jai Pal Vs the State of Hp and Others