Excelsior Correspondent
JAMMU, June 6: Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court has held that employee cannot seek stay at a particular place as a matter of right and it is for the employer to determine where the services of employee are required to be utilized in the department.
This significant judgment has been passed by Justice Puneet Gupta in a petition filed by Mumtaz Begum, a Junior Assistant with the JK BOSE, who was transferred from Sub-Office Kishtwar to Exam Unit-I, Jammu Division vide order No. 148-B of 2023 dated 25.04.2023.
The husband of the petitioner was also transferred to Estates, Jammu Division vide this order. The petitioner along with her husband challenged the transfer order in Writ Petition No. 1102/2023 which came to be disposed of vide order dated 03.05.2023. The case of the present petitioner was directed to be considered by the respondents in view of her health grounds and her minor children.
The respondents considered the representation of the petitioner and communicated the decision vide order dated 29.05.2023, impugned in the present petition. The petitioner has been given choice by the respondents to either opt for transfer at J&K BOSE, Rehari, Jammu or at Board Office, Srinagar. It was also mentioned that the accommodation shall also be provided to the petitioner at Srinagar or Jammu wherever she chooses her place of posting.
After hearing both the sides, High Court said, “petitioner has no case to set up qua the order/communication impugned in the present writ petition. The case of the petitioner has been considered sympathetically and even given two choices of posting both at the main cities of the UT where the medical facilities are admittedly better than the one at Kishtwar where the petitioner intends to remain”.
“The petitioner has even been offered Government accommodation in the city where she intends to get posted. The respondents have taken due care of the representation made by the petitioner. The directions passed in the disposed of writ petition have been substantially carried out by the respondents while passing the impugned communication/direction”, Justice Puneet said, adding “the argument of the petitioner that she has not been given personal hearing in the matter is without any justification. There was no obligation on the part of the respondents to grant personal hearing to the petitioner while considering the representation”.
“The petitioner cannot seek her stay at a particular place as a matter of right. It is for the employer to determine where the services of employees are required to be utilized in the department. The arguments raised in the petition challenging the order impugned are without any substance”, High Court said while dismissing the petition.
Trending Now
E-Paper
Follow our WhatsApp channel