CWP No. 1179 of 2011. 30.3.2011 Present: Mr. Dalip K. Sharma, Advocate, for the petitioners. Mr. R. K. Bawa, Senior Advocate, with Mr. Trilok Jamwal, Advocate, for respondents No. 1 and 2. CWP No. 1179 of 2011 and CMP No. 1582 of 2011 This is not the first time that petitioners have approached any Judicial Tribunal/Court in the matter of their personal transfers. Petitioner No. 1 is husband of petitioner No. 2. Both are employed with the respondents. Some time in the year 2008 petitioners were transferred to Tissa from Shimla when they approached the erstwhile Himachal Pradesh Tribunal and obtained stay order in their favour. In August, 2009 they were again transferred on promotion to Rohru when again they obtained stay order in their favour. Subsequently when petitioners were transferred to Kangra they approached this Court by filing CWP No. 7170 of 2010 with a specific prayer that they be allowed to complete the academic year of their children and then be posted in district Kangra. Under these circumstances this Court, vide order dated 18.11.2010 stayed the order of transfer of the petitioners from Shimla to Kangra. Strangely in the said writ petition petitioners made a request that they be allowed to be adjusted in any five places of their choice in districts Mandi, Solan and Bilaspur. This request was accepted and the petition was disposed of vide order dated 7.1.2011 with a direction that petitioners’ representation for adjustment be decided by the respondents. However, while deciding the said writ petition the Court was constrained to observe the manner in which petitioners maneuvered to stay at the place of their choice. -2- Undisputedly, in compliance of the orders passed by the Court respondents have now transferred both the petitioners, being a couple case, to Bilaspur, a station of their choice in terms of the impugned order dated 7.3.2011 (Annexure P-10). Petitioners have now assailed the same on the ground that due to intervening developments, petitioner No. 1 had to undertake medical treatment at I.G.M.C. Shimla and further undergo knee surgery some time in June, 2011. 2. Notice in the petition was issued on 14.3.2011 on a limited ground. Respondents were to inform the Court whether it was possible to adjust the petitioners in Shimla till June, 2011. Mr. R. K. Bawa, learned Senior Advocate alongwith Mr. Trilok Jamwal, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents No. 1 and 2 has placed on record written instructions dated 19.3.2011. It stands clarified that at Bilaspur there is a Zonal Hospital having better medical facilities. Additionally it is always open for petitioner No. 1 to apply for the appropriate leave. Petitioners’ transfer is pursuant to the orders passed by the Court. They cannot be allowed to abuse the process of law. They must adhere to the undertaking given by them. No ground for interference is made out at all. Petitioners cannot be accommodated in Shimla any longer. They have also completed their normal tenure. They have no legal right of being posted at a station of their choice. Their transfer, in public interest, is due to administrative exigencies. There is also no arbitrariness in the impugned action nor are there any special equities in their favour. -3- 3. In view of the aforesaid interim order dated 14.3.2011 is vacated. If not already relieved, respondents shall henceforth relieve the petitioners who shall join their place of posting within a period of seven days. 4. No other point urged. Petition stands disposed of so also the pending application(s), if any. Dasti copy. (Sanjay Karol), Judge. March 30, 2011 (PK)