AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Arindam Lodh, J
Heard Mr. Ratan Datta and Mr. R.G. Chakraborty, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. Kohinoor N. Bhattacharyya, learned GA appearing for respondents-State.
By way of filing the present writ petition, the petitioner has challenged his transfer order dated 24.11.2023(Annexure-3 to the writ petition).
Mr. Datta, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner was subjected to frequent transfers.
I have perused the writ petition and the documents enclosed therein. Prima facie I find that the petitioner is subjected to frequent transfer.
Transfer is an incidental to service. On administrative ground the employer can transfer its employees and the Court’s power is very limited.
However, considering the nature of the complaint made in the present writ petition, I request learned GA to look into the matter.
It is submitted that the petitioner has filed a representation before the concerned authority of the respondents, but, that representation has not been disposed of till today.
In view of this, I direct the District Magistrate & Collector, South Tripura, Belonia to dispose of the representation of the petitioner with reasoned order within a period of 2(two) weeks from today. If the petitioner is aggrieved of any order of the respondents, he may approach before the appropriate Court. In the meantime, the petitioner shall not be released till disposal of the writ petition.
List the matter on 18.12.2023.