Dismissed

Bhim Sain v. State of Haryana & Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC12 Apr 2016CWP/7058/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court dismissed a writ petition challenging the transfer of the petitioner, an Assistant Food and Supply Officer, from Hisar to Jind. The court held that non-fortifiable transfer policies do not bar transfers, familial ailments do not warrant cancellation without evidence of inadequate treatment in the new posting, and non-mala fide transfers for administrative reasons stand upheld even near

What did the court decide?

The writ petition challenging the transfer order was dismissed in limine.

Bhim Sain Vs State of Haryana & Ors. — Service and Employment | Punjab & Haryana HC (2016)

¶1

C. W. P. No. 7058 of 2016 1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.

¶3

Case No. : C. W. P. No. 7058 of 2016

¶4

Date of Decision : April 12, 2016

¶5

Bhim Sain .... Petitioner

¶6

vs.

¶7

State of Haryana and others .... Respondents

¶8

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK SIBAL.

¶9

¶10

To be referred to Reporters or not ?

¶11

Whether the judgment should be reported in the digest ?

¶12

¶13

Present : Mr. Naresh Jain, Advocate for the petitioner.

¶14

¶15

DEEPAK SIBAL, J. :

¶16

Through the present petition, the petitioner, who serves the respondents as an Assistant Food and Supply Officer, challenges the order of his transfer from Hisar to Jind on the ground that he is to retire on 31.05.2017, he and his wife suffers from several ailments and that respondent no. 3 has remained posted at Hisar for the majority of his career and has again managed to get himself transferred in Hisar. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the transfer of the petitioner is against the applicable transfer policy of the Government of Haryana and thus, illegal.

¶17

The reliance of the petitioner, to challenge his order of transfer, on the transfer policy of the Government of Haryana, is misconceived as it

¶18

MONIKA 2016.04.22 11:10 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document

¶19

C. W. P. No. 7058 of 2016

¶20

¶21

is the settled law that such policies are only to guide the Administrative Authorities while ordering transfers and are not enforceable in a Court of law, especially when no extreme hardship has been shown nor mala fide even alleged. The fact that the petitioner is to retire in the middle of the next year cannot be considered to be a bar against his transfer. His and his wife's ailments also cannot be made the basis to cancel his transfer as there is nothing on record to show that he and his wife cannot receive adequate treatment in Jind i.e. the place to which he has been transferred. In the absence of any mala fide, it can safely be presumed that the petitioner has been transferred for administrative reasons.

¶22

In view of the above, finding no merit in the present petition, the same is ordered to be dismissed.

¶23

No costs.

¶24

( DEEPAK SIBAL ) JUDGE

¶25

April 12, 2016 monika

¶26

MONIKA 2016.04.22 11:10 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document

Bhim Sain v. State of Haryana & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bhim Sain v. State of Haryana & 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

Gagandeep & Anr. Vs Panjab University

Kaptan Singh Vs Uttar Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam & Anr.

Vinod Kumar Vs State of Haryana and Ors.

Dharambir Vs State of Haryana & Others

Balwant Singh and Ors. Vs State of Haryana and Ors.

Sanjay Dabas and Ors. Vs State of Haryana and Ors.