Reserved IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition No.873 of 2008 (S/S) Smt. Dashrati Khan ...Petitioner Versus State of Uttarakhand and two others ….Respondents Shri Manoj Tiwari, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri N.P. Sah, learned Standing counsel for the respondents. Dated : January 9th 2009 Hon’ble V.K. Bist, J. Heard Shri Manoj Tiwari, learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri N.P. Sah, learned Standing Counsel for the respondents. Present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner for quashing the transfer order dated 01.09.2007 passed by respondent no.2-Director, Panchayat Raj, Uttarakhand, Dehradun as well as order dated 28.04.2008, whereby respondent no.3 was directed to relieve the petitioner. 2 Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner was appointed on the post of Junior Clerk vide order dated 04.10.1989 passed by respondent no.3. Thereafter, the petitioner was confirmed vide order dated 02.10.1998. At present the petitioner is working as Senior Clerk in the office of District Panchayat Raj Officer, Pithoragarh. Learned counsel for the petitioner drew attention of this Court to Rule 16(2) of the U.P. Panchayat Subordinate Ministerial Service Rules, 1979 which provides that the Appointing Authority (District Panchayat Raj Officer) shall prepare eligibility list of candidates, arrange in order of seniority and place it before the Selection Committee. Learned counsel for the petitioner argued that this provision of rules leaves no room for doubt that the Cadre of Ministerial employee serving in Subordinate Offices in the Department is District Level Cadre. Learned counsel for the petitioner further argued that since the appointing authority of the petitioner is District Panchayat Raj Officer and the post which the petitioner is holding is District Cadre post the petitioner can not be transferred outside the District. The ground taken in the writ petition that the post which the petitioner is holding is a District Cadre post has not been denied in the counter affidavit. The only ground taken in the counter affidavit is that the employee can be transferred anywhere within the state if said transfer is made on administrative ground and 3 since the petitioner was transferred on administrative ground the transfer order is valid. After hearing learned counsel for the parties, this Court is of the view that the stand taken by the respondent is incorrect and the petitioner could not have been transferred outside the District as appointing authority of the petitioner is District Panchayat Raj Officer which is clear from her appointment order dated 04.10.1989 and the post which she is occupying is a District Cadre post. This Court holds that transfer outside the Cadre cannot be made even on the administrative ground. Therefore, the writ petition is allowed, the transfer order as well as relieving order passed by the respondents are quashed. No order as to costs. (V.K. Bist, J.) 09.01.2009 Arti