Judgment

Nanavati, J.-Leave granted. Heard the learned counsel.

2. The Orissa Electrical Engineers’ Service Association filed Original Application No. 576 (C) of 1996 in the Orissa Administrative Tribunal, apprehending that some of the Electrical Engineers who are its members and Orissa State Government employees on deputation to the Orissa State Electricity Board (OSEB) are likely to be permanently transferred to the GRID Corporation of Orissa Ltd. or Orissa Hydro Power Corporation Ltd. on OSEB being abolished, under Orissa Electricity Reform Act. In view of the provision of the Act and the decision of the State Government to privatise procurement and distribution of electric energy the appellant further apprehended that the services of such members may be ultimately transferred to private companies and that will lead to losing their status as civil servants and varying their service conditions adversely. The appellant, therefore, wanted Sections 23, 24 and 25 of the Act and the Scheme Rules made thereunder to be declared ultra vires the Constitution.

3. The Tribunal held that it has no jurisdiction to judge the validity of the said provisions. It further held that the provisions regarding transfer of personnel appear to be reasonable. It was also of the view that the OA was rather premature. It, therefore, dismissed the OA.

4. Dr. Dhawan, learned counsel for the appellant, submitted that Section 24 which empowers the State Government to forcibly transfer personnel from one employer to another without giving them an option or obtaining their consent, is ultra vires the relevant provisions Constitution of India. He has also raised some contentions in the alternative, including the contention that the State Government has failed to ascertain the willingness of the personnel of the State Government sent on deputation to OSEB in accordance with sub-rule (7) of Rule 9 of the Orissa Electricity Reform Scheme Rules, 1996. As we are accepting this last contention, we do not think it necessary to decide correctness or otherwise of the other contentions.

5. By its letter dated 2.12.1996. addressed to the personnel of all the cadres on deputation to the OSEB the State Government called for their preferences for permanent absorption in GRIDCO/OHPC. It was stated in the said letter that “In the light of the above and in terms of sub-rule (7) of Rule 9 ibid, the Department of Energy, State Government invite the employees to send their preferences for absorption in GRIDCO or OHPC or in the State Government. The format in which the willingness and preference are to be given is enclosed. Please fill up the same and make sure that it is sent by post....In case your preference does not reach us by the stipulated date, your case will be decided on the assumption that your first preference is to remain in the organisation to which you were provisionally assigned by operation of the Transfer Scheme on 1.4.1996. The transfer of the personnel shall be decided on the criteria set forth in Rule 9(7) of the Transfer Scheme Rules......”

Relevant paragraphs in the format read as under :

“1. I have been provisionally assigned to work under OHPC/Gridco/State Government (strike out which is not applicable) by virtue of the Transfer Scheme framed under decision of the State Government. I understand that I have been given an opportunity to indicate my preference in the matter of my permanent absorption in OHPC, Gridco or the State Government before a final decision on this is taken. Accordingly, I am furnishing below my preferences :

......................1st preference

.....................2nd preference

......................3rd preference

2. I understand that while due consi­deration will be given to my preferences, a final decision on the matter will be taken on the basis of criteria set forth in the Transfer Scheme, which in addition to the preferences, will also include the ability and experience of the personnel, the number and n