CWP/8210/2023 on 29 December 2023

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA CWP No.8210 of 2023 Date of decision: 29.12.2023 Basia Ram

….Petitioner Versus State of H.P. & others

….Respondents ____________________________________________________

Coram:

The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Bipin Chander Negi, Judge. Whether approved for reporting ?1 For the petitioner: Mr. Dibender Ghosh, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General with Ms. Priyanka Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General, for respondents No.1 to 4. Mr. Sarthak Mehta, Advocate, for the applicant/petitioner in CMP No.18545/2023. Bipin Chander Negi, Judge

(Oral)

: The present petition has been filed by the petitioner, seeking following substantive reliefs:- “I) That writ in the nature of certiorari may kindly be issued against the respondents by quashing impugned office order No. Shiksh-SML-(Ele)(1-3)B(6)1/2023-29935-32 dated 30.09.2023, Annexure P-1, being illegal and arbitrary.

Whether the reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgement?

II) That a writ in the nature of writ of mandamus may be issued directing the respondents to allow the petitioner to work at GPS, Lalpani, BEEO Chopal, Tehsil Chopal, District Shimla, H.P.”

2. The specific allegation of the present petitioner is that the transfer in question made vide Annexure P-1, dated 30.09.2023, has been caused on the basis of D.O. Note. In this regard, record was called for. On a perusal of the record, it is evident that the transfer order in the case at hand has been made at the behest of a political functionary, who has nothing to do with the functioning of administrative department. On numerous occasions, transfers made on the basis of D.O. Note by political functionaries, who have nothing to do with the functioning of the administrative department, have come up before this Court, but the same have been deprecated.

3. In this regard, it would be appropriate to refer to judgment dated 20.07.2021, titled as Vipender Kalta vs. State of H.P. & Ors. Relevant paras are being reproduced hereinbelow:- “19. As held by this Court in Amir Chand vs. State of Himachal Pradesh, 2013 (2) HLR (DB) 648, we live in a democracy and our elected representatives under the Constitution to work in the legislature not as administrators. They cannot start interfering in the administration or the working of the Executive. It is they (Administrative Heads) who are the best judges to decide how department to be administered and

which employee should be transferred to which place. The politicians cannot done the role of administration.

20. It is unfortunate cases are coming up repeatedly before this Court, in which the impugned transfer orders or transfer cancellation orders unabashedly and brazenly state that the transfer order or transfer cancellation is being done by or at the instance of persons, who have no role, position or authority in the administration of the department.

21. The result of such political interference in the matter of transfers and postings of government servants is that the government servants get demoralized and they become affiliated to some political party or politician, which is wholly destructive of all norms of administration.

22. This court has repeatedly held that the transfer of officials/officers is required be effected on the basis of set norms and guidelines; this power cannot wielded arbitrarily, malafide or an exercise against efficient and independent officer or at the instance of politicians, who has no concern with the working of the department.

23. For better administration, the employees/officers must be shielded from fear of being harassed by the repeated transfers or transfers ordered at the instance of someone, who has nothing to do with the business of administration.”

4. In view of the aforesaid, the present transfer order dated 30.09.2023, is quashed and the present petition is disposed of accordingly. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, stand also disposed of.

(Bipin C. Negi) Judge 29th December, 2023 (reena)