D.K.Seth, J. - (1.) Having been appointed as Lekhpal at Dehradun In 1981. the petitioner came to Pauri Garhwal in 1985 through mutual transfer with one Hari Mohan Singh. On 22nd January. 1997 the petitioner was informed by Tehsildar, Kotdwar that pursuant to an order dated 3rd January, 1997 passed by the Commissioner, the petitioner was transferred to Dehradun on administrative ground and one Anil Kumar Negi may be given the charge. The petitioner made a representation. The order of transfer was stayed by an order dated 8th July, 1997. Thereafter, the petitioner made a further representation for allowing him to continue at Pauri Garhwal. On 2nd September, 1997. the Commissioner had endorsed that the order of transfer of Govind Ram to Dehradun be cancelled as is apparent from Annexure-7. On 11th September, 1997 the Commissioner appears to have withdrawn the stay of transfer of the petitioner passed on 8th July, 1997. It is apparent that while on 2nd September. 1997, the order of transfer of Govind Ram to Dehradun was directed to be cancelled by the Commissioner. The same Commissioner appears to have recalled the order of stay of transfer dated 8th July, 1997. This order has been communicated to the petitioner by a letter dated 26th September. 1997 by the Collector. It is very difficult to understand as to how the Commissioner can blow hot and cold at the same breath. In as much as while on 2nd September. 1997 he is directing cancellation of the order of transfer of Govind Ram to Dehradun and again on 11th September, 1997, he is transferring him to Dehradun by recalling the order of stay.
(2.) Dr. P. Padia, learned counsel for the petitioner contends that according to the provision contained in Lekhpal Rules, seniority of Lekhpal being districtwise, if transferred outside his seniority and promotional prospect would be affected. In terms of Rules 6, 7 and 21. the Commissioner cannot assume jurisdiction to exercise the said power. He further contends that there is no provision for transferring a Lekhpal from one district to other.
(3.) Mr. K. R. Singh, learned standing counsel on the other hand contends that the petitioner was originally appointed at Dehradun. Therefore, he was being repatriated to Dehradun. The petitioner cannot claim any right to stay in Pauri Garhwal. According to him, since he was transferred to Dehradun from Pauri Garhwal by virtue of an order passed by the Commissioner. therefore, the Commissioner has power to transfer a Lekhpal from one district to another. According to him there is no Infirmity in the order of transfer of the petitioner from Pauri Garhwal to Dehradun.;