Himachal Pradesh High CourtSusheel Kumar Awasthi vs State Of H.P. And Ors on 4 September, 2020Bench:Tarlok Singh Chauhan,Jyotsna Rewal DuaIN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA\n\n                                              CWP Nos. 2597/2020 with CWP No.2397/2020Reserved on: 2.9.2020\n                                              Decided on : 4.9.2020\n\n\n\n\n                                                                                       .CWP No. 2597/2020Susheel Kumar Awasthi                                                                .....Petitioner\n\n                                      Versus\nState of H.P. and ors.                                                               ....RespondentsCWP No. 2397/2020Daulat Ram                                                                           .....Petitioner\n\n                                      Versus\n\nState of H.P. and ors.                                                               ....Respondents\n\nCoram:The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Tarlok Singh Chauhan, Judge.\nThe Hon'ble Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge.Whether approved for reporting?1No.\nFor the Petitioner(s):                        Mr. Vishwa Bhushan, Advocate, for the\n\n\n\n\n\n                                              petitioner in CWP No. 2597/2020 and for\n                                              respondent No. 4 in CWP No. 2397/2020.\n                                              Mr. Vinay Sharma, Advocate, for the\n                                              petitioner in CWP No. 2397/2020 and for\n\n\n\n\n\n                                              respondent No.3 in CWP No. 2597/2020.For the Respondents:                          Mr. Ashok Sharma, A.G. with Mr. Ranjan\n                                              Sharma, Mr. Desh Raj Thakur, Addl.\n                                              A.Gs., with Ms. Seema Sharma, Dy.A.G.\n                                              for the respondents­State.Mr. Dushyant Dadwal, Advocate, for\n                                              respondent No.4 in CWP No. 2597/2020\n                                              and for respondent No.3 in CWP No.\n                                              2397/2020._____________________________________________________________________1Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes.::: Downloaded on - 04/09/2020 20:20:35 :::HCHP2Justice Tarlok Singh Chauhan, Judge\n\n\n\n\n                                                                  .The instant is a classical example of how one blue­eyed\n\n\n\n\n\nboy of the respondent­department can create havoc with lives of\n\n\n\n\n\nhis colleagues by getting them transferred here and there while\n\nenjoying posting of convenience for himself.2           The parties to both the lis are Class­I Officers and their\n\nincumbency is as under:­\n\n\nNo.\n\n                    Retirement\n\nSr. Name of Officer Date of Birth/ Date     of Home\n                                   Appointment District\n                                                               Previous\n                                                               Served\n                                                                               Station\n\n1   Rajiv Chandra   10.9.1965      20.1.1992       Chamba PCDO         Chopal\n                    30.9.2023                             20.1.1992        to\n                                                          12.12.1996\n                                                          PB          Salooni\n                                                          13.12.1996       to\n\n\n                                                          23.3.2000\n                                                          Pangi 24.3.2000 to\n                                                          30.6.2003\n                                                          Chamba 1.7.2003\n\n\n\n\n                                                          to 7.2011\n                                                          Study Leave 7.2011\n                                                          to 23.7.2013\n\n\n\n\n\n                                                          As SMS Bharmour\n                                                          24.7.2013        to\n                                                          9.12.2013\n                                                          Chamba          HQ\n\n\n\n\n\n                                                          10.12.2013 to till\n                                                          date.2   Daulat Ram      21.2.1963      28.4.1988       Chamba Tissa 4/88 to 4/94\n                    28.2.2021                             Bharmour 4/94 to10/98Bhatiyat 10/98 to10/03Bharmour 10/03 to6/08Bhatiyat 06/08 to06/10Shimla        (PSO)06/10 to 11/10Chamba 11/10 to05/13Bharmour 05/13 to::: Downloaded on - 04/09/2020 20:20:35 :::HCHP307/17Banikhet 07/17 to\n\n\n\n\n                                                             .12.10.2017\n                                                          DDH,       Kangra\n\n\n\n\n\n                                                          13.10.2017 to till\n                                                          date\n3   Sushil Kumar   5.4.1964    7.5.1990       Kangra      Tindi 5/90 to 5/93\n\n\n\n\n\n    Awasthi        30.4.2022                              Panchrukhi     5/93to 3/99Baijnath 3/99 to7/06Kangra 7/06 to6/08Panchrukhi 06/08to 05/11Kangra 05/11 to10/13ADH D/Sala 10/13r                                   to 07/16Palampur 07/16 to\n                                                          till date.\n\n\n\n3          Rajiv Kumar Chandra (private respondent in both thepetitions), who had been working as Subject Matter Specialist in\n\n\n\n\nthe office of Deputy Director of Horticulture, Chamba, was\n\n\n\n\n\npromoted to the post of Deputy Director of Horticulture in the\n\nmonth of June, 2020 and was ordered to be posted as SMO­cum­\n\n\n\n\n\nDDH (PIU), Directorate of Horticulture, Shimla, but he did not join\n\nhis duties, rather he in order to get himself adjusted at Chamba\n\napproached Sushil Kumar Awasthi (petitioner in CWP No.\n\n2597/2020) to give his consent for transfer to Dharamshala or\n\nelse, he would get him transferred to some other place.4          After obtaining consent of Sushil Kumar Awasthi, Rajiv\n\nKumar Chandra procured a D.O. note in his favour to get himself::: Downloaded on - 04/09/2020 20:20:35 :::HCHP4adjusted at Chamba and Sushil Kumar Awasthi at Dharamshala\n\n\n\n\n                                                                .in place of Daulat Ram (petitioner in CWP No. 2397/2020), who\n\n\n\n\n\nultimately was transferred as SMO­cum­DDH (PIU),Directorate of\n\n\n\n\n\nHorticulture, Shimla. These are the facts, which have been stated\n\non   oath   by   Sushil Kumar      Awasthi       while      filing     CWP       No.\n\n2597/2020.5Aggrieved by the transfer, Daulat Ram filed CWP No.\n\n2397/2020, which came up for consideration before this Court on\n\n\n16.7.2020 and the order of transfer, dated 13.7.2020 was ordered\n\nto be stayed qua him.6           This led the respondents­State taking a U­turn by\n\ncancelling transfer order of Daulat Ram and permitting him to\n\n\n\n\ncontinue    as   Deputy   Director      of   Horticulture,           Kangra        at\n\n\n\n\n\nDharamshala; and modifying transfer order of Sushil Kumar\n\nAwasthi while being transferred him as SMO­cum­DDH (PIU),\n\n\n\n\n\nDirectorate of Horticulture, Shimla vide order dated 21.7.2020.7           But surprisingly, the person, at whose instance entire\n\nchain of events took place, i.e. Rajiv Kumar Chandra has remained\n\nuntouched and was rather rewarded with a posting of his choice.8           Even   though,   Mr.       Dushyant         Dadwal,         Advocate,\n\nrepresenting Rajiv Kumar Chandra, would vehemently                        contend::: Downloaded on - 04/09/2020 20:20:35 :::HCHP5that it is on account of compelling family circumstances that his\n\n\n\n\n                                                                .client has been adjusted at Chamba, but we find no merit in such\n\n\n\n\n\ncontention inasmuch as if personal difficulties of Rajiv Kumar\n\n\n\n\n\nChandra        was   only   consideration,   which      weighed        with      the\n\nrespondents­State, then obviously, same parameters for judging\n\ndifficulties of other two persons, i.e. Daulat Ram and Sushil\n\n\n\n\nKumar Awasthi, ought to have been adopted by the respondents­\n\nState. Even otherwise, the transfer in question is not maintainable\n\n\nas the same has been effected on the basis of a D.O. note.9              In view of the aforesaid discussion, we find merit in\n\n\nboth the petitions and the same are accordingly allowed.Consequently, order, dated 13.7.2020 (Annexure P­1 in CWP No.\n\n\n\n\n2397/2020) and order dated 21.7.2020 (Annexure P­1 in CWP No.\n\n\n\n\n\n2597/2020) are quashed and set aside as the same have been\n\npassed only to accommodate Rajiv Kumar Chandra.                           Pending\n\n\n\n\n\napplication(s), if any, also stands disposed of, leaving the parties to\n\nbear their own costs.(Tarlok Singh Chauhan)\n                                                      Judge\n\n\n                                                 (Jyotsna Rewal Dua)\n    4.9.2020                                          Judge\n    (pankaj)::: Downloaded on - 04/09/2020 20:20:35 :::HCHP