KAMESHWAR Vs. STATE OF HP

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner, who is a class IV employee, is aggrieved by transfer from Jhungi Range to Sarkaghat Range. According to the petitioner his wife is seriously ill and requires constant care of the petitioner and treatment at PGI, Chandigarh and Mohali. Vide order dated 1.10.2010, we had directed to find out whether the petitioner can be accommodated at any nearby station. The Conservator of Forests, Mandi has informed that the petitioner had earlier been transferred and at that time he had approached this Court and after taking note of the fact that the petitioner had not completed at least two years of service at the station the petition was disposed of with the observation that it shall be open for the respondents to re-transfer him after a period of seven months. Therefore, it is submitted that the transfer order is solely in compliance of the order passed by this court. We are afraid that the order passed by this Court has not been properly appreciated. There is no direction of this Court to transfer the petitioner, we only gave liberty, if so required to the respondents to transfer the petitioner. Therefore, the question is whether the transfer is absolutely necessary or not. According to the petitioner, there are three posts at Jhungi Range. Out of the three posts, one post is vacant and two posts are being manned by the petitioner and another person. It is evident that in case the petitioner is transferred, there will be two vacancies. On this aspect instructions are not quite clear.

(2.) Be that as it may, in view of the factual position and the clarification of our order, we are of the opinion that the matter requires consideration by the second respondent. Therefore, it is necessary that the petitioner shall make a representation to the second respondent within a period of two weeks and the second respondent shall point out this aspect in his order within a further period of two weeks and shall pass appropriate order adverting to the submissions of the petitioner in accordance with law and justice. Interim orders passed on 1.10.2010 will continue till such orders are passed by the second respondent.

(3.) The petition stands disposed of, so also the pending application(s), if any.