IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.5262 of 2008(O&M) Date of Decision: 25.4.2008 L.M.Srivastava Petitioner Versus State of Haryana and others Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASBIR SINGH HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.C.PURI Present: Ms.Promila Nain, Advocate for the petitioner Shri Harish Rathee, Sr. D.A.G. Haryana Shri D.S.Patwalia, Advocate for respondent No.3 Jasbir Singh, J. (Oral) CM No.8096 of 2008 Application allowed, reply is taken on record. On request made by counsel for the parties, date in CWP No.5262 of 2008 is pre-poned from 9.5.2008 to today. CWP No.5262 of 2008 Petitioner, who is working as a Divisional Soil Conservation Officer and was posted at Gurgaon, has filed this writ petition with a prayer to issue a writ of certiorari to quash order dated 25.3.2008 (P/3), vide which he was transferred from Gurgaon to Rohtak. Against the post vacated by him, respondent No.3 was posted by transfer from Rohtak. At the time when notice of motion was issued on 31.3.2008, following contention of counsel for the petitioner was noticed by this Court:- “It is contention of counsel for the petitioner that it is his third transfer since July 2007. Counsel further states Civil Writ Petition No.5262 of 2008(O&M) that contrary to the Policy of the State government, respondent No.3 has been posted in his home district. It is specific averment of counsel for the petitioner that none of the transfer earlier made was at his instance.” In response to notice issued by us, reply has been filed by respondent No.3, wherein it has been stated that the petitioner is guilty of concealment of material facts because before filing this writ petition, respondent No.3 had already joined at Gurgaon. It has further been stated that as respondent No.3 is looking after the work of six districts, as such, his posting in his home district, was not objectionable and further that no mala fide has been proved on record in transferring the petitioner from Gurgaon to Rohtak. Counsel for the parties heard. It is apparent from the records that the petitioner, on his promotion, was transferred and posted at Sirsa vide order dated 3.7.2007. Vide the same order, on promotion, respondent No.3 was posted at Rohtak. It is necessary to mention here that before his transfer to Rohtak, respondent No.3 had been working at Gurgaon as Divisional Soil Conservation Officer. It is apparent from the records that within few months of his posting at Sirsa, the petitioner was transferred to Gurgaon against a vacant post, vide order dated 28.1.2008. It is contention of respondent No.3 and the State counsel that the above said transfer was made at the behest of the petitioner. We have seen the record, which indicates that the transfer order of the petitioner has emanated from the office of Chief Minister, Haryana. However, there is nothing on record to suggest that any application for his transfer from Sirsa to Gurgaon was moved by the petitioner. Within one month of his transfer 2 Civil Writ Petition No.5262 of 2008(O&M) to Gurgaon, the petitioner was again transferred vide impugned order on 18.3.2008 (P/3) to Rohtak against respondent No.3. In order Annexure P/3, it is specifically mentioned that posting of respondent No.3 has been made by giving relaxation in Policy, to appoint him in his home district. We have seen the original record, produced by Shri Rathee, as directed by us on the earlier date. In transferring the petitioner from Gurgaon to Rohtak, no reason whatsoever has been given. It has only been said that adjustments are being made vide order, under challenge. It is not in dispute that before his transfer to Rohtak, respondent No.3 had remained posted at Gurgaon. It appears that he is interested in remaining at Gurgaon that is why this transfer has been effected. It cannot be said that respondent No.3 is a very meritorious officer that is why, by giving relaxation he has been appointed in his home district. It is apparent from the records and not disputed before us that on 18.1.2007, punishment of Censure was awarded to respondent No.3 and he was also made to pay an amount of Rs.3585/-. That punishment has become final. It is also not in dispute that as per the official record, home district of respondent No.3 is at Gurgaon. An attempt has been made to show that he has sent an application to change his home district from Gurgaon to Dehradun. But his request is still pending. Be that as it may, even if policy provides that in cases where one officer has to look after the functioning of more than one district, he can be posted in his home district, it is desirable that officer be not given his home district, unless administrative exigencies require or some other competent officer is not available. We have noted with concern that in Haryana, transfers have become a routine affair. It is a see-saw battle between the employees. The 3 Civil Writ Petition No.5262 of 2008(O&M) employees are not enjoying security of tenure, as per policy, to remain at a particular station. In this case, the petitioner was transferred to Gurgaon only on 28.1.2008. He has joined there, he might have shifted his household articles also to that place and now within a short span of one month, he has again been transferred to Rohtak. It is relevant to mention here that when he was transferred to Gurgaon, his transfer was against a vacant post and he has not disturbed anybody. In view of facts mentioned above, we allow this writ petition and quash order dated 25.3.2008 (P/3). (Jasbir Singh) Judge April 25, 2008 (K.C. Puri) gk Judge 4