SHAKUNTLA DEVI Vs. STATE OF H P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner has assailed communication dated 27.5.2002 Annexure A-1 vide which the petitioner was ordered to be relieved as Assistant Project Officer (Women) at DRDA, Dharamshala with a direction to join as Ladies Social Education Organizer (LSEO) at Development Block, Rampur, District Shimla. It has also been prayed that petitioner may be considered duly promoted as Assistant Project Officer from the post of Ladies Social Education Organizer vide Annexure A-2. It has been submitted that communication dated 27.5.2002 has been issued without hearing the petitioner. THE petitioner vide office order dated 2/3.5.2002 who was LSEO ( Mukhiya Savika ), was promoted to the post of Development Officer ( Women Programme) purely on stop gap Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the Judgment? yes arrangement and was posted as Assistant Project Officer ( Women) on secondment basis in DRDA, Kangra.

(2.) THE perusal of communication dated 27.5.2002 indicates that department had issued corrigendum dated 15.5.2002 with reference to letter dated 16.5.2002 and thereafter communication dated 27.5.2002 was issued. THE Tribunal had not granted any interim order. THE learned counsel for the petitioner has stated that petitioner is working at Rampur Bhusher in compliance to communication Annexure A-1. THE office order dated 2/3.5.2002 was only a stop gap arrangement. THE corrigendum dated 15.5.2002 and letter dated 16.5.2002 on the basis of which communication dated 27.5.2002 was issued have not been assailed in the petition. THErefore, no relief can be granted to the petitioner when communication dated 27.5.2002 itself is based on corrigendum dated 15.5.2002 and letter dated 16.5.2002 which are left unassailed. THEre is no merit in the petition which is accordingly dismissed, so also the pending applications, if any.