PREM LAL Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD counsel for the parties. As short question is involved, petition is taken up for final disposal by consent forthwith.

(2.) THIS petition takes exception to the transfer order, dated 13th May, 2013. The principal argument, which has weighed with us, is that the impugned transfer order suffers from non -application of mind, inasmuch as it proceeds on the assumption that the petitioner was posted at Bagshad Block, Karsog Range, Karsog Forest Division, at the time of passing of the impugned order, dated 13th May, 2013, when, in fact, the petitioner, at the relevant time, was working at Pangna Range pursuant to partial modification of transfer order, dated 27th December, 2012. It is common ground that the petitioner had joined Pangna Range pursuant to the said order, but subsequent thereto, temporary charge at Tatta Pani was given to the petitioner vide order, dated 15th January, 2013, where the petitioner joined on that basis. Lateron, regular posting order at Tatta Pani was issued posting the petitioner at Tatta Pani vide order, dated 1st March, 2013. In other words, on 13th May, 2013, the . petitioner was admittedly not serving at Bagshad Block, Karsog Range, Karsog Forest Division.

(3.) THE argument of the respondents that the petitioner cannot be posted at Pangna Range because it is adjoining to his home Range is a matter which may be considered by the appropriate Authority before passing fresh transfer order, if so advised.