IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. C.W.P. No. 4233 of 2010. Decided on: 5th August, 2010. Shakti Singh. …Petitioner. -Versus- State of H. P. and others. …Respondents. Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kurian Joseph, Chief Justice. The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Sharma, Judge. For the petitioner. : Mr. Naresh Kaul, Advocate. For respondents No. 1 and 2. : Mr. R.K. Sharma, Senior Additional Advocate General. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Justice Rajiv Sharma, J.(Oral): Petitioner has assailed the office order dated 20.07.2010 (Annexure P-4), whereby he has been transferred from Regional Poultry Farm Kamlahi (Shimla) to Veterinary Dispensary Jarol (Shimla) vice respondent No. 3. 2. The case of the petitioner, in a nut-shell, is that he was appointed as Veterinary Pharmacist in the month of January, 1999. Thereafter, he was transferred to Central Veterinary Dispensary Chalonthi. On 06.01.2005, he was transferred to V.D. Rampur Keonthal (Shimla). Thereafter on 28.06.2008, he was transfered from Veterinary Dispensary Rampur Keonthal to Veterinary Dispensayry Bhagog. He was again transferred from Veterinary Dispensary Bhagog to Regional Poultry Farm Kamlahi on 09.09.2009. He started discharging his duties as Veterinary Pharmacist at Regional Poultry Farm, Kamlahi (Shimla), however, vide order dated 20.07.2010 (Annexure P-4), the respondent No. 3, who was under transfer vide order dated 6th July, 2010 from Veterinary Dispensary Kashaut (Shimla) to Veterinary Dispensary Soja (Mandi) and was adjusted at Veterinary Dispensary Jarol (Shimla), was further adjusted at regional Poultry Farm Kamlahi (Shimla). 3. Mr. Naresh Kaul, learned counsel for the petitioner has strenuously argued that respondent No. 3 has remained posted at Regional Poultry Farm Kamlahi (Shimla) for a period of more than fifteen years and has also worked for more than 1 & ½ years at Kashaut (Kaithu), Shimla. 4. Mr. R.K. Sharma, learned Senior Additional Advocate General has vehemently argued that since the petitioner has remained posted within a radius of 20 kilometers since 5th May, 2001, there is no illegality in the issuance of office order dated 20th July, 2010. 5. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and gone through the pleadings carefully. 6. The respondent-State was aware of the material facts at the time when the petitioner was transferred from Veterinary Dispensary Bhagog to Regional Poultry Farm, Kamlahi on 09.09.2009. He has joined his duties at Regional Poultry Farm, Kamlahi. Respondent No. 3, who has remained posted in and around Shimla for a period of more than 16 years, was initially transferred to Veterinary Dispensary Soja (Mandi) and was adjusted at Veterinary Dispensary, Jarol (Shimla), has now been brought to Regional Poultry Farm Kamlahi (Shimla) vice the petitioner. It is apparent that the entire exercise has been undertaken by the respondent-State to accommodate respondent No. 3 at Regional Poultry Farm Kamlahi (Shimla), where he has remained for more than 15 years. Respondent No. 3 has remained posted either at Regional Poultry Farm Kamlahi (Shimla) or at Kashaut (Kaithu) Shimla. 7. It is for the employer to decide where a particular employee is to be transferred in larger public interest, however, it is equally settled that the orders passed by the authorities must conform to Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India. However, in the instant case, the petitioner has been transferred to a place which is at a distance of 70 kilometers from Shimla only to accommodate the respondent No. 3. 8. Accordingly, in view of the observations made hereinabove, the writ petition is allowed. Annexure P-4, dated 20th July, 2010 is quashed and set aside. Respondents are directed to permit the petitioner to discharge his duties for normal tenure, as prescribed under the transfer policy at Regional Poultry Farm Kamlahi (Shimla). No costs. (Justice Kurian Joseph), Chief Justice. (Justice Rajiv Sharma), Judge. August 05, 2010. (bhupender)