Petitioner sought to quash transfer from Amritsar to Chandigarh alleging repeated transfers. Court found petitioner admitted belonging to Amritsar and transfer is a service incident. No ground made out; writ dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
139
In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, at Chandigarh
Civil Writ Petition No. 906 of 2023
Date of Decision: 17.01.2023
Pawan Kumar
... Petitioner(s)
Versus
State of Punjab and Others
... Respondent(s)
CORAM: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Anil Kshetarpal.
Present: Mr. Arihant Goyal, Advocate for the petitioner(s).
Mr. Gurpreet Singh, Additional Advocate General, Punjab.
Anil Kshetarpal, J.
(Anil Kshetarpal) Judge
January 17, 2023 “DK”
Whether speaking/reasoned :Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No
DEEPAK KUMAR BHARDWAJ 2023.01.19 12:43 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the repeated transfer of a petitioner employee from Amritsar to Chandigarh discloses a prima facie case for quashing under Article 226.
Pawan Kumar
State of Punjab and Others
Anil Kshetarpal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
