LAWS(JHAR)-2005-1-12

NAVIN KUMAR SINGH Vs. JHARKHAND STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD

Decided On January 24, 2005
NAVIN KUMAR SINGH Appellant
V/S
JHARKHAND STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE question that falls for consideration in this writ petition is as to whether the petitioner, a Junior Engineer in the Jharkhand State Electricity Board posted only about nine months ago at Adityapur Circle, Jamshedpur, has been made victim of political maneuvering and conspiracy and has been transferred from Adityapur as a measure of victimization by the impugned order of transfer dated 2.12.2004.

(2.) PETITIONER was posted as Junior Engineer at Adityapur Circle which is an industrial area. He alleged to have started taking stern action against those consumers who were illegally consuming electricity which resulted in filing of a complaint dated 3.11.2004 by the Adityapur Small Industries Association. They, in their complaint to the Member (T and D), Jharkhand State Electricity Board, alleged that petitioner is harassing the entrepreneurs and, therefore, he should be transferred. That complaint was followed by another letter written by Jharkhand Janjagaran Vikas Party to the Chief Minister making some allegations against the Junior Engineer. Acting on the said letter and complaint the respondents -Board, without making any inquiry, issued notification dated 2.12.2004 transferring the petitioner from Adityapur circle.

(3.) BY filing additional supplementary affidavit the petitioner has also brought to the notice of this Court that from 1998 till February, 2002 while he was posted at Electrical Supply Section, Tatisilway, Rural Ranchi Division, Ranchi, at his instance, revenue to the tune of Rs. 50,00000/ - (fifty lacs) was collected and in about 10 days, 15 first information reports were lodged for theft of energy against the consumers. It has been specifically alleged that there are number of Junior Engineers who are posted in Jamshedpur, Area electricity Board for more than six years but they are continuing in one place. On the contrary, because of the action taken by the petitioner against the consumers, he has been made victim of the order of transfer.