HET RAM Vs. STATE OF HP

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner is aggrieved by Annexure P-1, order of transfer. According to the petitioner, on account of physically challenged situation of his son, the transfer will be visiting him with very serious hardship.

(2.) Learned Senior Additional Advocate General points out that transfer is only to nearby institution, which is only around one k.m. away from the present place of working. It is also pointed out that for about two decades, the petitioner has been working at Kamla Nehru Hospital only. However, according to the petitioner, he is now replaced by a contract employee, which is impermissible under law. It is also submitted that though the distance is only 1 k.m., but it takes more time for him to reach to the hospital and on account of peculiar difficulty(s), in which he is placed (on account of physical disability of his son), it will not be possible for him to give due attention to his son. It is submitted that he is going to undergo operation of his son and hence the petitioner is on leave.

(3.) The petitioner may point out all these aspects before the first respondent, in which case the first respondent will look into the grievance(s) of the petitioner and pass appropriate order in accordance with law and justice within another one month. It will be open to the petitioner to continue on leave in view of the operation of his son, till such time. The petition stands disposed of, so also the pending application(s), if any.