The Himachal Pradesh High Court has dismissed a petition against the transfer of a state government driver which had been made on the recommendation of the Employees’ Unions/Associations. The Court said despite its orders such non-consensual transfers of the employees of the respondents-Corporation were being made. It asked the road transport corporation not to entertain such recommendations by any of the Employees’ Unions for non-consensual transfer of employees.
The division bench comprising Justice Tarlok Singh Chauhan and Justice Satyen Vaidya noted,
“People’s faith in independence of judiciary is of paramount consideration not only in public interest, but also in the interest of society. To protect the faith of the people in the independence of the judiciary developed, established, accepted by a consistent tradition from time immemorial, is the avowed duty of every one of us, especially of lawyers, judges, legislators and the executives.”
The bench decided upon the question that whether the order of transfer can be sustained, when the same has admittedly been carried out on the basis of the complaint made by the Bharatiya Mazdoor sangh, one of the five unions of the road transport corporation.
Justice Chauhan said in such circumstances, the conduct of the petitioner (posted as Assistant In-charge Driver Duty at Regional Workshop, Mandi), to say the least, is deplorable. The people, who lose faith in the judiciary, are required to be condemned and curbed by one and all, who are interested in orderly society and have faith in democracy. This is the basic creed of our Constitution.
The bench remarked that it was appalled by the gross indiscipline existing in the respondent-Corporation where a member of different unions are acting as extra-constitutional authorities and not only making but actually effecting their recommendations for non-consensual transfers, especially, of their opponents.
“It is rather very unfortunate that 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,”
-the court observed while dealing with an identical case titled as Sushil Kumar vs. State of H.P. & ors. decided on 9.9. 2021.
Also Read: Contest: Essay writing competition in honour of Supreme Court advocate and PIL pioneer Lily Thomas
The petitioner here in was engaged as a Driver on contract basis on June 19, 1999 and thereafter his services were ordered to be regularized vide order dated June 19, 2000.
In July/August 2019, the petitioner was engaged as Assistant In-charge Drivers Duty vide order dated August 28, 2019, the petitioner was posted as Assistant In-charge Driver Duty at Regional Workshop, Mandi, however, shortly this assignment was withdrawn by the corporation vide order dated 13.09.2019 with a direction to the petitioner to work as a Driver.
However, subsequently vide order dated 28.08.2020, the petitioner was again posted as In-charge Drivers Duty with immediate effect but the said order was withdrawn on the next day i.e. August 29, 2020, constraining the petitioner to file the instant petition at the hand.
Read the order below
HP-Court2