C.W.P. No. 13394 of 2007 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.W.P. No. 13394 of 2007 Date of decision : 18.3.2008. ... Mrs. Suman Kumari ................ Petitioner vs. State of Haryana and others .................Respondents Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Jasbir Singh Hon'ble Mr. Justice K.C. Puri Present: Sh. Mansur Ali, Advocate for the petitioner Sh. Harish Rathee, Senior Deputy Advocate General, Haryana for respondents No. 1 to 3. Ms. Puja Satija, Advocate for respondent No.4. ... Jasbir Singh, J. (Oral) The petitioner has come to this Court to lay challenge to the order dated 21.8.2007 (Annexure P-5), vide which the order transferring her from Morni to Panchkula was cancelled. Further challenge is to the order dated 23.8.2007 vide which she was relieved from Panchkula in consequent to order Annexure P-5. It is an admitted fact that respondent No.4 is posted in Panchkula since from the year 1996. In July 2002, the petitioner was C.W.P. No. 13394 of 2007 -2- transferred from Sirsa to Panchkula. However, that order was cancelled in the month of August, 2002 and she was sent to Raipur Rani, District Panchkula. On 19.7.2005, she was again transferred from Raipur Rani to Panchkula. That order was also cancelled on 26.7.2005. Again on 13.8.2007 (Annexure P-4), the petitioner was transferred from Morni to Panchkula. In consequent to that order, she joined at Panchkula. It appears that respondent No.4 again was successful in getting that order cancelled on 21.8.2007 (Annexure P- 5). Hence, this writ petition. Sequence of facts mentioned in this petition, clearly indicates that a favour has been shown to respondent No.4 by the official respondents. She is sitting in Panchkula since from the year 1996 and as and when she was transferred out of Panchkula, she was successful in getting her transfer cancelled. It appears that she is successful in manipulating her stay at Panchkula, in one way or the other. Other employees, similarly situated are also required to be posted in a city. The petitioner has been transferred to Panchkula but that order has now been cancelled, apparently only to adjust respondent No.4, who was transferred to Morni vide order Annexure P-4, which is situated only at about 30 kms from Panchkula. In view of the facts mentioned above, we feel that the orders Annexures P-5 and P-6 cancelling the transfer of the petitioner from Morni to Panchkula and then relieving her, are not justified. These orders seem to be mala fide, which is not expected from the official respondents. C.W.P. No. 13394 of 2007 -3- In view of this, the writ petition is allowed. Orders Annexures P-5 and P-6 stand quashed. The petitioner be allowed to join at Panchkula forthwith. ( Jasbir Singh ) Judge ( K.C. Puri ) 18.3.2008. Judge chug