Back
2008(5) Supreme 434
Supreme Court of india
Tarun Chatterjee and Aftab Alam, JJ.
The Government of A.P. — Appellant
versus
G. Venkata Ratnam — Respondent
Civil Appeal No. of 2008
[Arising Out of Slip No. 5654/07]
Decided on : 21-07-08
Facts of the case :
Issue in consideration in present case was regarding validity of transfer of respondent a technical assistant in department of archaeology and museums, government of andhra pradesh posted in office of director, archaeology and museums, , hyderabad to office of assistant director technical),archaeology and museums, kakinada.
Findings of the court :
High Court judgment was wholly untenable and was rather unusual and strange. Judgment was apparently delivered in anger which might have been caused by government pleader or director. However as a result the court not only lost judicial poise and restraint but also arrived at completely unfounded conclusions. The judgment stated about how red fort at delhi was vandalized by british and how damages of colonial times were perpetuated by archaeological survey of india. It was held incomprehensible as to how red fort, maintenance of which government of andhra pradesh was not even remotely connected with, comes into all this. The reference to plight of red fort was followed by observation that ancient monuments and archaeological sites in andhra pradesh too were in no better state. Court declared that agencies and people entrusted with responsibility to preserve and maintain country’s historical heritage were quite incapable and inefficient in discharge of responsibility. Court seemed to have been completely taken in by ipse dixit of respondent and his tall claims about his own ability and virtually allowed him to choose his own place of posting. High court’s finding regarding lack of bona fide in matter on part of state government held to be completely unfounded and untenable. Respondent’s transfer neither suffered from violation of any statutory rules nor could it be described as mala fide by any stretch of imagination. Impugned order of high court being unsustainable held liable to be set aside.
Result : Appeal allowed.
Order
Leave granted.
2.Heard learned counsel for the parties.
3.The respondent is a Technical Assistant in the Department of Archaeology and Museums, Government of Andhra Pradesh. He was posted in the Office of Director, Archaeology and Museums, Hyderabad, where he was able to stay, since his appointment in the year 1985, uninterruptedly for a period of 20 years. He was transferred from Hyderabad and posted in the Office of the Assistant Director (Technical), Archaeology and Museums, Kakinada by an Order issued by the Director on 29 June, 2005. He challenged his transfer Order before the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal in O. A. No. 3050 of 2005. At that time his appeal filed before the departmental authorities was pending. Hence, the Tribunal disposed of the application by Order dated 4 July, 2005 with a direction to the concerned departmental authority to dispose of the appeal within four weeks. The departmental appeal was finally dismissed by Order dated 3 August, 2005. The respondent once again approached the Tribunal in O. A. No. 4048 of 2005 but the Tribunal declined to interfere in the matter and dismissed the O.A. by Order dated 27 December, 2005.
3.The respondent took the challenge to his transfer Order to the Andhra Pradesh High Court in Writ Petition No.2886 of 2006. The High Court allowed the writ petition and set aside the Order of the respondent’s transfer by Judgment and Order dated 23 February, 2007. The State has come in appeal against the Judgment and Order passed by the High Court.
4.The High Court Judgment is wholly untenable and, we regret to say, it is rather unusual and strange. The Judgment was apparently delivered in anger. The anger might have been caused by the Government Pleader or the Director (the second respondent before the High Court) but as a result the Court not only lost the judicial poise and restraint but also arrived at completely unfounded conclusions. The Judgment quotes a passage from William Dalrymple’s book, ‘The Last Mughal’ about how the Red Fort at Delhi was vandalized by the British and how the damages of the colonial times are perpetuated by the Archaeological Survey Of India . One fails to see how the Red Fort, the maintenance of which the Government of Andhra Pradesh is not even remotely connected with, comes into all this. The reference to the plight of the Red Fort is followed by the observation that the ancient monuments and archaeological sites in Andhra Pradesh too are in no better state. In this way the Court declares that the agencies and the people entrusted with the responsibility to preserve and maintain the country’s historical heritage are quite incapable and inefficient in the discharge of the responsibility. But once again we fail to see the relevance of all this to the simple issue before the Court. Unfortunately this is not the only incongruity. The Judgment makes, at more than one place, highly caustic comments about Government Officers, especially the members of the Central Civil Service, which in the facts and circumstances of the case appear to us to be completely uncalled for.
5.The Court seems to have been completely taken in by the ipse dixit of the respondent and his tall claims about his own ability and virtually allowed him to choose his own place of posting. The Judgment at its beginning recounts the respondent’s qualifications that include two Master’s degrees, one in Sanskrit and the other in Archaeology, a B. Ed. degree in Sanskrit and the degree of Sahitya Shiromani from Sri Venkateswara University. The Judgment then proceeds to observe as follows :
“The petitioner as it appears from the pleadings is a highly qualified man. The confidence with which he made assertion in the affidavit dated 13.3.2006 to the effect that ‘if any other employee has my skill, knowledge, expertise and experience I forego my job’ makes this Court examine this matter in depth and not treat the impugned Order as a mere Order of transfer in the course of administration.”
It
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
