AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
T.S. Doabia, J.
This order shall dispose of SWP No. 2012 of 1998 and SWP No. 2047 of 1998. SPW No. 2012 of 1998 was taken up for preliminary hearing
on 6.11.1998. Mr. J.P. Singh had put in appearance on behalf of the respondents. He has filed objections.
Vide various orders passed by the respondentcorporation, the petitioners have been transferred from Sawalkote Project to Dhuliganga Project in
the State of U.P. These orders have been marked as Annexure `H' collectively. Order in the case of Girdhari Singh appearing at page 23 of the
paper book is reproduced below :
Shri Girdhari Singh, Asstt. (Spl Gr) W7 employee No. 300012F is transferred and posted to Dhauliganga H.E. Project. He shall stand relieved
from this project w.e.f. 9.11.1998 (A.N.) with the direction to report to the General Manager Dauliganga H.E. Project.
He will be entitled to TTA/Joining time as per rules.
This issues with the approval of the competent authority.
This order is challenged inter alia on the following grounds :
(i) that this has not been passed by the Competent authority.
(ii) that the respondents have no proper guidelines in transfer matters;
(iii) Most of the petitioners were earlier working in the Salal Project. They were transferred to the present project. They cannot be sent to other
projects.
The respondents have filed objections. The stand taken by them is that Sawalkote Project is being handed over by the NHPC to the State of
J&K. In this situation, the petitioners are being transferred to other Projects.
It be seen that the above stand was taken orally earlier on 6.11.1998 also. This was opposed by the petitioners' counsel. It was in this situation,
the respondent were directed to file written objections. As indicated above, these objections have since been filed.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the stand taken by the respondents that the project in question is being handed over to the State
Government is incorrect. He submits that the Bank accounts are still being operated. It is further submitted that the total liability of the NHPC has
not been met by the State Government. It is under these circumstances stated that it is wrong to assume that the Project is being handed over to
the State Government.
One of the communications which has been placed on the file by the respondents indicates that a sum of Rs. 5 crore has since been paid by the
State Government to the Corporation. This becomes apparent when communication dated 14.1.1998 (annexure R/5) is perused. A further
communication dated 7.2.1998 indicates that list of items which are subject matter for being handed over has also been prepared and these have
been handed over to the Assistant Executive Engineer (Civil) of Power Development Department J&K State.
I am of the opinion that no interference is called for in these petitions. Any interference by this court would put a stop to the process which has
been initiated by the NHPC Limited to hand over the project to the State Government. It is possible that the complete handing over may not be
there. As a matter of fact a complete handing over of the Project would be there only once the employees who are working with the Corporation
are adjusted at other places. It is in pursuance of this process that the petitioners are being transferred to other Projects. If this be the situation then
it is not possible to grant any relief to the petitioners.
The question as to whether the order impugned has been passed by the Competent Authority or not all that is required to be said is that there is a
recital in the order that the same has been passed after getting approval of the Competent authority. After the decision was taken by the
Competent authority, steps to issue the formal orders have been taken by the Assistant Administrative Officer.
So far as absence of any policy pertaining to transfer is concerned, it be seen that in the present case the petitioners have been transferred only
because of the handing over of the project to the State Government. This has led to the situation which the petitioner are facing. This extraordinary
steps have been taken with a view to safeguard the interest of the petitioners. Therefore, the plea that the petitioners' transfer cannot be effected,
cannot be sustained. These are not the normal transfer but have been made in view of the extraordinary situation explained above.
The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the Chief Minister of J&K State has given an assurance that those employees who are State
subjects would be adjusted in the Project after it is taken over by the State Government. It be seen that the State is not a party to the present
litigation. The petitioners are left free to pursue the matter with the State Government. Nothing said in this order shall affect the cause of the
petitioners.
There is no merit in these petition. The impugned orders are purely administrative in nature. Grant of any interim order or any interference would
lead to halting a process which was initiated long way back. These petitions are as such found to be without merit and are dismissed.
Learned counsel for the petitioners has made an oral submission that he wants to prefer a Letter Patent Appeal in this case. It is submitted that for
some time the operation of the orders by which the petitioner are being relieved be stayed. This limited prayer is allowed. The
respondentCorporation shall keep the impugned orders of transfer in abeyance for a period of ten days.
Petitions dismissed.