Deepak Kumar Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.

Deepak Kumar vs State of Jharkhand and ors.

Disposition Appeal dismissed Court Jharkhand Decided Feb 07, 2007

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/515936

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/515936
Court: Jharkhand High Court
Judge: N.N. Tiwari, J.
Decided On: Feb 07, 2007
Subject: Service
Disposition: Appeal dismissed

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

- MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, 1988[C.A.No.59/1988] Section 166; [A.K. Patnaik, CJ, A.K. Gohil & S. Samvatsar, JJ] Application for compensation for personal injury Death of injured claimant subsequently for some other reasons Held, Claim for personal injury will abate on the death of claimant. Claim will not survive to ...

Key legal issue: Service
Outcome / disposition: Appeal dismissed

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Deepak Kumar

Respondent

State of Jharkhand and ors.

Legal References

Reported In: [2007(2)JCR85(Jhr)]

Excerpt

- motor vehicles act, 1988[c.a.no.59/1988] section 166; [a.k. patnaik, cj, a.k. gohil & s. samvatsar, jj] application for compensation for personal injury death of injured claimant subsequently for some other reasons held, claim for personal injury will abate on the death of claimant. claim will not survive to his legal representative except as regards claim for pecuniary loss to estate of claimant.ordern.n. tiwari, j.1. in this writ application, the petitioner has prayed for quashing the notification vide memo no 3948, dated 30th december, 2006, whereby the petitioner has been transferred from the post of assistant engineer, meso area, ranchi to the post of assistant engineer, meso area, latehar. he has also prayed for quashing the notification vide memo no. 3947, dated 30th december, 2006, whereby respondent no. 6 has been transferred as assistant engineer, meso area, ranchi.2. the grievance of the petitioner is that the petitioner has been transferred at the instance of the minister, human resources development department, government of jharkhand, who has got no concern with the petitioner's department, and that the order of transfer has not been issued in accordance with law.3. a counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of respondent nos. 2 and 4 stating inter alia, that the decision for transfer of the petitioner was taken by the concerned establishment committee, taking into consideration the news item published in the newspaper, and that the same has absolutely no nexus with any letter of the minister, human resources. development department, government of jharkhand. it has been stated that the minister has not even named the petitioner in the said letter and that nothing has been done at his instance.4. on perusal of the aforesaid letter of the minister, i find no mention of the name of the petitioner and there is no base to contend that the petitioner has been transferred at the instance of the said minister.5. the supreme court has repeatedly held that the order of transfer should not be ordinarily interfered with by the court, as the transfer is an incidence of service, and the concerned department has to see, who is to be posted where.6. in view of the above fact, i find no ground to interfere with the impugned transfer order. this writ application is, accordingly, dismissed.

Full Judgment

ORDER

N.N. Tiwari, J.

1. In this writ application, the petitioner has prayed for quashing the notification vide Memo No 3948, dated 30th December, 2006, whereby the petitioner has been transferred from the post of Assistant Engineer, MESO Area, Ranchi to the post of Assistant Engineer, MESO Area, Latehar. He has also prayed for quashing the notification vide Memo No. 3947, dated 30th December, 2006, whereby respondent No. 6 has been transferred as Assistant Engineer, MESO Area, Ranchi.

2. The grievance of the petitioner is that the petitioner has been transferred at the instance of the Minister, Human Resources Development Department, Government of Jharkhand, who has got no concern with the petitioner's department, and that the order of transfer has not been issued in accordance with law.

3. A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of Respondent Nos. 2 and 4 stating inter alia, that the decision for transfer of the petitioner was taken by the concerned Establishment Committee, taking into consideration the news item published in the newspaper, and that the same has absolutely no nexus with any letter of the Minister, Human Resources. Development Department, Government of Jharkhand. It has been stated that the Minister has not even named the petitioner in the said letter and that nothing has been done at his instance.

4. On perusal of the aforesaid letter of the Minister, I find no mention of the name of the petitioner and there is no base to contend that the petitioner has been transferred at the instance of the said Minister.

5. The Supreme Court has repeatedly held that the order of transfer should not be ordinarily interfered with by the Court, as the transfer is an incidence of service, and the concerned department has to see, who is to be posted where.

6. In view of the above fact, I find no ground to interfere with the impugned transfer order. This writ application is, accordingly, dismissed.

Same Court & Year Jharkhand · 2007 Same Parties Deepak Kumar vs State of Jharkhand and ors. Same Subject Service Same Judge N.N. Tiwari, J.

Service