IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Civil Writ Petition No.15874 of 2009 DATE OF DECISION : JULY 27, 2010 DALJIT SINGH ....... PETITIONER(S) VERSUS STATE OF PUNJAB & ORS. .... RESPONDENT(S) CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAI LAMBA PRESENT: Mr. Deepak Sibal, Advocate, for the petitioner(s). Mr. BS Chahal, DAG, Punjab. AJAI LAMBA, J. (Oral) This petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India has been filed praying for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari quashing order dated 30.9.2009 (Annexure P-10) vide which the petitioner, serving as a Driver, has been transferred from PHC, Naushehra Pannuan under CHC, Kairon, District Tarn Taran, to PHC, Lopeka, District Amritsar, for administrative reasons. On 15.10.2009, the following order was passed:- “Learned counsel contends that the petitioner, a driver, had the courage to report the misconduct of respondent No.4 i.e. Dr. Dinesh Gupta, Medical Officer, CHC, Naushera Pannuan, District Tarn Taran. Enquiries have been initiated. Civil Writ Petition No.15874 of 2009 2 There is a considerable delay in passing the final order although proceedings have been concluded. Learned counsel contends that in view of the consistent stand of the petitioner in reporting the matter, the petitioner has now been made the victim and has been transferred out. Learned counsel states that the petitioner has been working on an Ambulance. Public cause is going to suffer because no other driver has been transferred in place of the petitioner as would be evident from Annexure P-10. Notice of motion for 26-2-2010. Order, Annexure P-10 shall be kept in abeyance. Respondent No.1 is directed to file an affidavit as to under what circumstances the enquiry proceedings have not been concluded. In case, the proceedings are concluded, respondents are directed to pass a final order on the enquiry proceedings, by 31.1.2010. Copy of the order be given under signature of the Reader of this Bench.” Learned counsel for the respondent-State has pointed out that the petitioner has been serving at PHC, Naushehra Pannuan under CHC, Kairon, District Tarn Taran, since 6.7.1988. His transfer is being effected after 21 years of service at the same place. In regard to the other contention made on behalf of the petitioner viz. that the petitioner had made certain complaints, it has been pointed out that the inquiry has already been concluded, as would be evident from Annexure R-2 and, therefore, there is no impediment in the transfer of the petitioner. I have considered the issue. It is not in dispute that the petitioner has been serving at the Civil Writ Petition No.15874 of 2009 3 same station for 21 years. The service conditions, by virtue of the transfer of the petitioner vide the impugned order, are not changed/altered. It is not the case of the petitioner that he is not serving on a transferable post. In such circumstances, I do not find any right of the petitioner to continue to serve at the same place. So far as the contention re: the petitioner working on a Ambulance and no other driver having been posted in his place, is concerned, it has been brought out that there is another Ambulance in the immediate vicinity of the area and, therefore, public service shall not be affected. In view of the above, this petition is dismissed. July 27, 2010 ( AJAI LAMBA ) Kang JUDGE 1. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 2. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?