REGENT COMPUTRONICS PVT. LTD.

PRADEEP SHARMA Appellant

V/S

STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH Respondents

Referred Judgements :-

SHILPI BOSE (MRS.) AND OTHERS VS. STATE OF BIHAR AND OTHERS [REFERRED TO]
ABANI KANTA RAY VS. STATE OF ORISSA AND OTHERS [REFERRED TO]
E P ROYAPPA VS. STATE OF TAMIL NADU [REFERRED TO]
B VARADHA RAO VS. STATE OF KARNATAKA [REFERRED TO]
UNION OF INDIA VS. H N KIRTANIA [REFERRED TO]
UNION OF INDIA VS. S L ABBAS [REFERRED TO]
CHIEF GENERAL MANAGER TELECOM N E TELECOM CIRCLE VS. RAJENDRACH BHATTACHARJEE [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH VS. S S KOURAV [REFERRED TO]
BALWANTSINGH VS. STATE OF PUNJAB [REFERRED TO]
NATIONAL HYDROELECTRIC POWER CORPORATION LIMITED VS. BHAGWAN SHIV PRAKASH [REFERRED TO]
PUBLIC SERVICES TRIBNAL BAR ASSOCIATION VS. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH [REFERRED TO]
UNION OF INDIA VS. JANARDHAN DEBANATH [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH VS. GOBARDHAN LAL [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF U P VS. SIYA RAM [REFERRED TO]
KENDRIYA VIDYALAYA SANGATHAN VS. DAMODAR PRASAD PANDEY [REFERRED TO]
SOMESH TIWARI VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
RAJENDRA SINGH VS. STATE OF U P [REFERRED TO]
UNION OF INDIA VS. MURALIDHARA MENON [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF HARYANA VS. KASHMIR SINGH [REFERRED TO]

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner, an Assistant Excise and Taxation Commissioner, is aggrieved by notification dated 20.05.2020 (Annexure P-2), issued by respondent No.1, whereby he has been transferred from Una to EIU (H.Q) in the office of ETC, H.P., Shimla, against vacancy in public interest.

(2.) In support of his challenge to the impugned transfer, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner contended that:-

(3.) Learned Senior Additional Advocate General as well as learned counsel representing respondent No.3 submitted that consequent upon his promotion as Assistant Excise and Taxation Commissioner, respondent No.3 was promoted as such in Una in public interest, vide notification dated 20.05.2020 (Annexure P-3), where he has already joined. A government official can be employed in any manner required by the Authority and who should be transferred where, is a matter for the appropriate authority to decide. Normal tenure of service prescribed under the transfer policy is not applicable in case of officials holding Class-I post, in view of following para 10 of the Transfer Policy:-

Click here to view full judgment.

PRADEEP SHARMA Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

Referred Judgements :-

JUDGEMENT

QUick Links

Get in Touch

Email

Contact Numbers

Address