IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.13368 of 2010 Date of Decision : July 30, 2010. Lubhaya Ram .....Petitioner versus Punjab State Electricity Corporation Ltd. and others .....Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT. Present : Mr.Sunil Kumar Sharma, Advocate, for the petitoner. -.- 1. Whether Reporters of Local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? --- Surya Kant, J. (Oral) The petitioner is working as a Lower Divisional Clerk in the respondent-Corporation and is said to be permanently disabled to the extent of 70%. It appears from the record that he is the office bearer of Employees Union also. The petitioner has been transferred vide the impugned order dated 21.7.2010 (Annexure P-12) from Pathankot to Tarn- Taran. It is alleged that the petitioner was posted at the present place in December, 2009 only and that the transfer order has been got issued by respondent No.3 against whom the petitioner is said to have made certain complaints etc. From the documents on record, it appears that the petitioner spends most of his time on extra-office activities instead of devoting C.W.P.No .13368 of 2010 2 himself to his duties as a Lower Divisional Clerk. The transfer of such like employee so as to discipline him and other employees and to restore the office work culture, is always a measure in the administrative interest. That being so, no case to interfere with the impugned transfer order by this Court in exercise of its writ jurisdiction is made out. However, having regard to the fact that the petitioner's family would also be uprooted and he is stated to be physically disabled, liberty is granted to him to make a representation before respondent No.2 with an unconditional apology and undertaking that in future, he will cause no complaint. On giving an undertaking of good behaviour by the petitioner, respondent No.2 is directed to consider his request for cancellation of the impugned transfer order and/or to post him at some nearby place. The petitioner's representation shall be decided by respondent No.2 within a period of one month from the date of receiving a certified copy of this order. Till the petitioner's representation is decided, he may be allowed to continue at Pathankot. Ordered accordingly. Dasti. July 30, 2010 (SURYA KANT) Mohinder JUDGE