LALAN SHARMA Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned Counsel for the respondent -State.

(2.) LEARNED Counsel for the petitioner submits by referring to a copy of his joining letter (Annexure -3) that in compliance with the order of his transfer, the petitioner had submitted his joining at his transferred post at Chakulia. Inspite of the joining letter the petitioner was not allowed to work and neither to sign on the attendance register, only on the plea that the petitioner had not produced his relieving order from his previous place of posting. The petitioner thereafter filed his representation (Annexure -9) before the concerned higher authorities of the respondents and in response, he was informed by letter dated 28.7.2006 (Annexure -7) that the relieving order purportedly passed on 23.12.2005. was annexed with the letter. However, to the petitioner's surprise, no such enclosure was found along with the letter and the petitioner thereafter promptly informed the concerned authorities about absence of the enclosures to the letter. However, even in absence of the relieving order but on the basis of the order of transfer and the communication forwarded to the petitioner by the Executive Engineer vide letter dated 28.7.2006. The petitioner was allowed to join his duties at Chakulia on and from 10.10.2006.

(3.) FROM the rival submissions as it appears, the petitioner was though transferred from Noamundi to Chakulia by order dated 25.11.2005, he was not promptly served with his relieving order from his place of posting. As it appears, upon receiving the order of his transfer, the petitioner promptly proceeded to join his post at the transferred place, but he was not allowed to join.