Allowed

Laxman Singh v. Dakshin Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam and Others

Punjab & Haryana HC14 Aug 2019CWP/22666/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this CWP, the petitioner challenged his transfer by Dakshin Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam. Lacking a reply and evidencing no public exigency, the Court set aside the order, allowing the writ petition while permitting transfers only if strictly following policy.

What did the court decide?

Impugned transfer order set aside; Writ petition allowed; Case remanded for transfer in accordance with policy.

Laxman Singh Vs Dakshin Haryana… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Punjab & Haryana HC (2019)

¶1

-1-

¶2

CWP No.22666 of 2017 (O&M)

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

CWP No.22666 of 2017 (O&M) Date of Decision.14.08.2019

¶5

Laxman Singh ...Petitioner

¶6

¶7

Dakshin Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam and others ...Respondents Present: Mr. Laxman Singh, petitioner in person.

¶8

None for respondents.

¶9

CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL

¶10

-.-

¶11

AMIT RAWAL J. (ORAL)

¶12

In this case notice of motion was issued on 4.10.2017 but Dakshin Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam has not filed reply so far.

¶13

Prayer in writ petition is for quashing of order dated 22.09.2017 whereby petitioner has been transferred from Hassanpur Palwal to Taoru.

¶14

As per contention of petitioner, who appeared in person, he joined respondent Nigam on 15.10.1997 on the post of Assistant Lineman and thereafter became Assistant Foreman (AFM) w.e.f. 15.10.2013. On 13.07.2016 (Annexure P-1) transferred from office of SDO (OP), S/Divn, Hodel to Hathin and after two months from SDO(OP), S/Divn Hathin to Hodel vide order dated 21.09.2016 (Annexure P-2). After completion of nine months, again transferred from Hodel to Hassanpur vide order dated 29.06.2017 (Annexure P-3). When petitioner had completed just three month again vide order dated 22.09.2017 (Annexure P-4) transferred from Hassanpur, Palwal to Taoru, Sohna. The aforementioned transfer is not in accordance with transfer policy, much less, in public interest so that petitioner could be transferred under certain exigencies. Petitioner stated to have submitted representation but no action has been taken. Family is totally PANKAJ KUMAR 2019.08.19 17:45 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶15

-2-

¶16

CWP No.22666 of 2017 (O&M)

¶17

dependent on him as he has two sons and daughter studying in B.Sc. and parents are of old age, thus, impugned order is liable to be quashed.

¶18

In the absence of any reply as well as any representation on behalf of respondent Nigam or counsel, I proceed to decide case on merits. It is strange that respondents have not chosen to contest the case by filing reply as notice of motion was issued way back in 2017. Detailed chart showing transfers of petitioner is reproduced herein below:-

¶19

Sr. No.	From			To		Office Order No. & Date
1	SDO (OP) S/Divn	Hodel	SDO Hathin	(OP)	S/Divn	163 13.07.2016
2	SDO (OP) S/Divn	Hathin	SDO Hodel	(OP)	S/Divn	254 21.09.2016
3	SDO (OP) S/Divn under (OP) Divn, P	Hodel, alwal	SDO Hassa (OP)	(OP) npur Divn. P	S/Divn under alwal	173 29.06.2017
4	SDO (OP) Hassanpur under Divn. Palwal	S/Divn (OP)	SDO Taoru, (OP),	(OP) unde Divn. S	S/Divn r XEN ohna	657 22.09.2017

¶20

In the absence of any explanation, I am of the view that no public exigency has been expressed supporting case of transfer. In such circumstances, in my view, impugned order was not maintainable in eyes of law and hereby set aside. However, it will not prevent respondents to pass general order of transfer strictly following any policy, if applicable, considering all facts in accordance with law and not in the manner and mode as noticed above.

¶21

Writ petition stands allowed in above terms.

¶22

		(AMIT RAWAL) JUDGE
August 14, 2019
Pankaj*
	Whether speaking/reasoned	Yes
	Whether reportable	No

¶23

PANKAJ KUMAR 2019.08.19 17:45 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Laxman Singh v. Dakshin Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Laxman Singh v. Dakshin Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam 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

Paramjeet Sharma Vs State of Haryana and Others

Bhupinder and Anr. Vs State of Haryana and Another

Naman Sharma Vs State of Haryana and Another

Prashant Yadav Vs Haryana Public Service Commission

Arun Garg Vs State of Haryana and Others

Dinesh Vs State of Haryana and Others