Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
SUBBA REDDY SATTI, J.
R. Padmaja Rani – Petitioner
Versus
The State of Andhra Pradesh and Others – Respondents
Writ Petition No. 15492 of 2023
Decided On : 06-08-2024
Transfer - Writ Petition - G.O.Ms. No. 71 Finance (H.R.I-PLG. & POLICY) Department - The court upheld the transfer of the petitioner as it was based on administrative grounds and not in violation of the guidelines, emphasizing the limited scope of judicial review in such matters.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner challenged her transfer from Assistant Audit Officer to a different post, claiming it was illegal and against government guidelines. She argued that the transfer was arbitrary and unconstitutional, especially since her husband was also an employee in the same department.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the transfer was justified on administrative grounds due to complaints against the petitioner. It ruled that the transfer did not violate any statutory provisions and that the petitioner had suppressed material facts in her application.
Issues: Whether the transfer order was legally sustainable and whether the petitioner approached the court with clean hands.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that transfers made for administrative reasons are generally not subject to judicial review unless they violate statutory provisions or are made in bad faith. The petitioner’s failure to disclose relevant facts undermined her claim.
Result: The Writ Petition is dismissed.
ORDER :
1. This writ petition is filed seeking the following relief:
2.........
(b) The petitioner’s husband, who is physically challenged, is also an employee of State Audit and he was working as Examiner of accounts, in the Municipal Corporation, Vizianagaram. Petitioner’s husband was later transferred to Municipal Corporation, Rajahmundry, in terms of G.O.Ms. No. 71 dated 17.05.2023.
(c) While the matter stood thus, the petitioner was transferred to Gudivada Municipal Council vide proceedings in Roc. No. 65-C/a1/2023-24 dated 31.05.2023 and the same was kept in abeyance by proceedings dated 01.06.2023. However, by proceedings in Roc. No. 30802/15-1/C1/2023 dated 22.06.2023 petitioner was removed from the in-charge post of District Audit Officer and was transferred to Gudivada Municipal Council by proceedings dated 23.06.2023, before completion of one year in Rajamahendravaram, where she joined on 30.06.2022. The said transfer is contrary to the guidelines issued in G.O.Ms. No. 71 dated 17.05.2023. Hence, the writ petition.
3.........
(b) The transfer was affected in accordance with the guidelines of the Government and the Head of the Department and thus, it does not suffer from any infirmity and arbitrariness. The transfer order dated 31.05.2023 was initially kept under abeyance on the ground that an Inquiry was going on against the petitioner, based on the representations submitted by agitated employees. The Inquiry officer proposed to conduct an Inquiry on 10.05.2023. In the meanwhile petitioner went on leave from 06.05.2023. The inquiry was conducted on 10.05.2023 and the report is awaited.
(c) Subsequently, the abeyance order was revoked vide memo dated 01.06.2023. Therefore, the petitioner was relieved vide proceedings dated 23.06.2023. The petitioner refused to receive the orders issued on 31.05.2023. The petitioner, by securing the copies of relieving orders from the staff approached this Court by misrepresenting the facts. Respondent No. 3, after assessing the prevailing situation transferred the petitioner and the same was endorsed by respondent No. 2. Eventually, prayed to dismiss the writ petition.
4. Respondents 5 to 19 also filed a counter affidavit with similar averments as plea
Judicial review of administrative transfers is limited; transfers based on administrative grounds are generally upheld unless shown to be arbitrary or in violation of statutory rules.
Transfers in public service can be made on administrative grounds without detailed justification, provided they do not violate statutory rules or are made in bad faith.
The court affirmed that transfer orders are administrative decisions and should not be interfered with unless proven to be arbitrary or in violation of statutory provisions.
Judicial review of transfer orders is limited; transfers made on administrative grounds are valid unless shown to be arbitrary or malicious.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the issue of transfer is a prerogative of the employer, and the courts cannot interfere with transfer orders made on administrative grounds un....
Transfers of employees in public service are generally not subject to judicial review unless proven to be arbitrary or in violation of statutory provisions.
Courts cannot interfere with transfer orders unless shown to be an outcome of malafide exercise or in violation of statutory provisions prohibiting such transfer.
Transfer orders in public service are valid unless proven mala fide or in violation of statutory provisions.
Judicial review of employee transfers is limited; transfers are administrative unless proven mala fide or in violation of statutory provisions.
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
