Allowed

Monika v. the State of Hp and Others

Himachal Pradesh HC12 Sept 2024CWP/9747/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single Judge set aside a transfer order of the petitioner, a government employee, on the grounds that it was based on a DO note of an Ex-MLA, citing a prior Division Bench judgment which had quashed a similar error.

What did the court decide?

Impugned transfer order dated 06.09.2024 set aside; liberty granted to State to take conscious decision on transfer after tenure completion.

Monika Vs the State of Hp and Others — Service and Employment | Himachal Pradesh HC (2024)

¶1

2024:HHC:8449

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT

¶3

SHIMLA

¶4

CWP No. 9747 of 2024 Decided on : 12.09.2024

Smt. Monika

…Petitioner

Versus

State of Himachal Pradesh and others.

¶9

…Respondents

¶10

Coram

¶11

Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge Whether approved for reporting?¹

¶12

For the petitioner : Mr. Prashant Sharma, Advocate. For the respondents : Mr. Pushpinder Jaswal, Additional Advocate General.

¶13

Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge (Oral )

¶14

Learned Additional Advocate General on instruction,

¶15

informs the Court that it is a matter of record that the transfer of

¶16

the petitioner has been effected on the basis of a DO note of an

¶17

Ex-MLA.

¶18

Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that vide

¶19

order dated 06.09.2024, Annexure P-2, the petitioner has been ordered to be transferred from Bilaspur to Kinnaur. He further

¶20

submits that this transfer is on the basis of a DO note of an Ex-

¶21

1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

¶22

¶23

2024:HHC:8449

¶24

MLA. He submits that earlier also the petitioner was transferred on the basis of a DO note and she approached this Court by way of CWP No. 3926 of 2023, titled Monika Vs. State of H.P. & Ors, which writ petition was allowed by the Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court, in terms of Annexure P-1, dated 20.06.2023, by setting aside the transfer of the petitioner, as it was based on a DO note. Accordingly, the contention of the petitioner is that as the present transfer of the petitioner is also based on a DO note, the same is bad.

¶25

The factum of transfer of the petitioner having been effected on the basis of a DO note, has not been disputed by the respondents. As earlier transfer of the petitioner which was based on a DO note, was held to be bad by the Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court, the present transfer of the petitioner in terms of Annexure P-2, which is also on the basis of a DO note, cannot be sustained in law. What was bad earlier is bad now too.

¶26

Therefore, this writ petition is disposed of by setting aside the impugned transfer order, dated 06.09.2024, Annexure P-2, qua the petitioner, but with liberty to the State, that as the

¶27

¶28

2024:HHC:8449

¶29

petitioner has completed her normal tenure at the given station, the respondents can otherwise take a conscious decision to

¶30

effect the transfer of the petitioner, in accordance with law. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also stand

¶31

disposed of accordingly.

¶32

(Ajay Mohan Goel) Judge

¶33

September 12, 2024

¶34

(Shivank Thakur)

Monika v. the State of Hp and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Monika v. the State of Hp and Others

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

Savita Kumari Vs State of Hp, through Secretary( Education)

Anand Kumar Vs Hrtc and Another

Vinod Kumar Vs the State of Hp and Others

Usha Kumari Sharma Vs State of Hp and Others

Kanchan Lata Vs the State of Hp and Another

Dilbag Singh Vs State of Hp and Another