IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No. 2221 of 2007 Date of decision: 8.1.2008. Karam Singh Kaundal … Petitioner Versus State of H.P. & Anr. … Respondents Coram : The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Deepak Gupta, Judge. The Hon’ble Mr. Justice V.K. Ahuja, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 Yes. For the Petitioner: Mr. Ramakant Sharma, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. R.K. Bawa, Advocate General, with Mr. J.S. Guleria, Law Officer, for respondent No. 1. Mr. Vijay Verma vice Mr. Onkar Jairath, Advocate, for respondent No. 2. Per V.K. Ahuja, J.: This judgment shall dispose of the writ petition filed by the petitioner under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India for quashing the order passed by the learned State Administrative Tribunal in O.A. No. 449 of 2007 dated 14.12.2007, vide which the Original Application filed by the petitioner against his transfer order was dismissed. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the petitioner who is working as Lecturer in Mathematics in Government Polytechnic College Hamirpur, has challenged his transfer order to Government 1Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? No. 2 Polytechnic College, Rohru, vide order dated 16.12.2006. The petitioner earlier had also filed Original Application against his transfer order and vide order passed by the learned Tribunal on 28.12.2006, his Original Application was directed to be treated as representation. The said representation was rejected by the State Government and he filed an Original Application before the learned State Administrative Tribunal challenging his transfer order and rejection of representation. The main ground taken by the petitioner was that since he is also a trained NCC Officer, the training being imparted to the students at Government Polytechnic College, Hamirpur is going to be stopped and his services will not be utilized as there is no N.C.C. Troop at Rohru. In the reply filed by the respondents, they pleaded that transfer was made in public interest since respondent No. 2 had served there for six years and was due for transfer. They also pleaded that there is no merit in the plea that he can impart N.C.C. training at Hamirpur since one K.S. Katoch who has also undergone training is presently looking after the NCC work at Hamirpur. It was pleaded that there are two lecturers in subject of Maths at Hamirpur since respondent No. 2 had already joined on his transfer to Hamirpur, but there is no one to teach subject of Maths in Government Polytechnic College, Rohru and, therefore, the transfer order of the petitioner made in the public interest are not liable to be cancelled. Both these pleas were considered by the learned Tribunal in its impugned order. It was clearly mentioned that the petitioner was recruited as lecturer in Mathematics and the N.C.C. duties of the N.C.C. Officer are only additional duty which may be given to him. The plea made by the petitioner in this regard had also been considered by the Principal Secretary(Education) as observed by the learned Tribunal in its 3 impugned order that there is none to teach Mathematics in Government Polytechnic College, Rohru and the petitioner has completed his normal tenure at Hamirpur. The plea taken by the petitioner that the transfer orders have been effected ignoring the directions issued by the State Government vide its letter dated 1.5.2003 (Annexure P-1), which provides that it has been desired by the Hon’ble Chief Minister and Hon’ble Education Minister that ANOs(NCC) may not be transferred to non NCC institutions. These instructions are directory in nature and the word used is may and not shall. The basic duties of the petitioner are to impart education in Mathematics to the students of the College and this work he is doing of giving N.C.C. training is in addition to his duties. These pleas have been duly considered by the Principal Secretary(Education) in the representation as well as by the learned State Administrative Tribunal which had upheld the transfer order passed by the State Government. The said order passed by the learned Tribunal does not suffer from any illegality and calls for no interference by this Court. In view of the above discussion, there is no merit in the writ petition filed by the petition, which is dismissed accordingly. CMP No. 3411 of 2007: In view of the orders passed in the main petition, this application has become infructuous and is disposed of accordingly. ( Deepak Gupta ), Judge. ( V.K. Ahuja ), January 8, 2008 Judge (BSS) 4