news details |
|
|
| Court refuses to interfere in transfers | | | EARLY TIMES REORT
JAMMU, Sept 27: In a significant observation, also a reiteration of various judgments of the Supreme Court, the Jammu and Kashmir High Court today said that the transfers and postings of employees is a prerogative of the employer (government in this case) and the Courts should not interfere in such matters.
Justice Nirmal Singh of Jammu and Kashmir High Court, Jammu Wing, said that the courts are not to interfere in the transfer matters and can interfere only in exceptional cases pertaining to transfer where transfer orders are passed in violation of rule or by an incompetent person. He was hearing a writ petition filed a Head Draftsman of the Power Development Department.
“It is for the employer to see whether an employee is suitably adjusted”, observed Justice Singh.
In the petition filed through Adv Romesh Arora it has been submitted that petitioner Ashok Kumar working as head draftsman in PDD vide order April 19, 2007 was transferred from Sub-Transmission Division No 1 Jammu and posted in electric maintenance and RE Division III Jammu against the available vacancy. Petitioner was again transferred on June 9, 2008 and posted in the procurement and material management wing Jammu. The petitioner has challenged said order on the ground that his transfer and posting to procurement and material management wing Jammu is pre-mature.
Justice Singh, after hearing Deputy AG S Hakim for the State and PDD and Adv Anil Sethi appearing for the private respondent, who joined against the post which was vacant due to transfer of petitioner, observed that keeping in view the various judgments of the Apex Court, Court is of the considered view that the transfer is one of the exigencies of the service and in the present case there is no allegation that the order impugned transferring the petitioner from Maintenance and RE Division-III Jammu to Procurement & Material Management Wing Jammu, has been passed by the incompetent Authority. Only allegation leveled that before passing order impugned, approval of the Government has not been obtained.
Further more, the transfer of the petitioner is within Jammu and private respondent BL Saini head-draftsman has joined in place of petitioner on June 16, 2008 whereas interim order was passed in favour of the petitioner by the High Court on June 18, 2008. Therefore, this petition on the date of filling has become in fructuous, therefore, there no merit in this petition which is dismissed. However the petitioner is at liberty to prefer a representation before the respondents. It is for the competent authority to consider its representation, if any preferred, Court observed. JNF |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
