Back
2020 Supreme(Kar) 1843
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
S.SUJATHA, RAVI V. HOSMANI, JJ.
SMT. KAVITHA B.L. WIFE OF CHANDRASHEKAR B.R. - PETITIONER
Vs.
STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT FINANCE DEPARTMENT (EXCISE) VIDHANA SOUDHA BENGALURU - Respondent
WRIT PETITION No.8637/2020 (SKSAT)
WITH
WRIT PETITION No.8641/2020 (SKSAT)
Decided On : 11-08-2020
For the Petitioner: SRI A.S. PONNANNA, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR SMT. LEELA P., ADV.
For the Respondent:SRI. R. SUBRAMANYA, ADDL. ADVOCATE GENERAL FOR
SMT. SHIPLA S. GOGI, HCGP, SRI. M.S. BHAGWAT, ADV.
Headnote:
Constitution of India,1950 - Article 162 - Karnataka Excise Act, 1965 - Section 55 - Service - Order of transfer is contrary - Transfer Guidelines - Whether impugned order of alleged transfer issued by Commissioner of Excise in Karnataka – Respondent No.2 is justifiable - Whether Tribunal was justified in rejecting the applications filed by petitioners challenging impugned order - Whether the Tribunal exceeded its jurisdiction in treating the transfer of an employee of Group C or D from one Secretariat Department to another Secretariat Department or from one office to another in same Headquarters, as ‘transfer’ - Whether it is a ‘premature transfer’ Government Order defines transfer - Petitioner Smt. Hemavathi C.H. joined service of the State of Karnataka in the Department of Excise as Sub-Inspector by direct recruitment - After completion of her training period, in month she was posted at Shivamogga as Sub-Inspector of Excise and has served in various other posts during her tenure of service - Order of respondent petitioner was transferred and posted to the post of Inspector of Excise, Sampangiramanagara Range, Bengaluru South District - It is averred again vide order - Respondent No.2 has prematurely transferred the petitioner from the post of Inspector of Excise South District to United Spirit Urban District. Challenging the said order of transfer, an application was preferred by the petitioner in Application before the Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal at Bengaluru – Held, Tribunal while addressing the issues involved in the applications has proceeded to make some observations inasmuch as the transfer made within the same head quarters are not entitled to seek transfer grant/joining time etc., and the same has not considered while framing the guidelines - While raising a question as to, an employee of Group C or D if transferred from one Secretariat Department to another Secretariat Department or from one office to another in the same headquarters, can it be treated as transfer, Tribunal has expressed its opinion Government shall treat all Ranges in Bengaluru Urban Excise District as one office/unit/place or headquarters for purpose of transfer - Observation has been made that the State Government has not carried the decision of the Full Bench of this Court in S.N. whereby it has been interpreted that the transfer from one office to another within the same head quarters to take up duties of a new post tantamounts to transfer - Tribunal declining to interfere with the impugned order of transfer cannot be held to be bad in law – Court have made it clear observation made by Tribunal inasmuch as the fullbench decisions of this Court was unwarranted and unjustifiable - Such remarks cannot be approved - Writ petitions are dismissed
ORDER :
Since common and akin issues are involved in these matters, they are heard together and disposed of by this common order.
Facts in Writ Petition No.8637/2020:
2. The petitioner – Smt. Kavitha B.L. joined the service of the State of Karnataka in the Department of Excise as Sub-Inspector by direct recruitment on 21.05.2004. She served as Sub-Inspector of Excise at Jeevan Bheema Nagara Range, Bangalore East District from February 2005 to October 2009. Thereafter, in the month of October 2009, she was promoted as Inspector of Excise and was posted at Shashi Distillery Private Limited. During August 2014, she was transferred as Inspector of Excise, Vijayanagara Range, Bengaluru. From 4th of April 2018 to July 2018, she has served as Inspector of Excise at Dandeli Range, Uttar Kannada District during the Karnataka State Assembly elections. It is averred that on completion of Election duty, the said petitioner was not given any posting at the earlier post, but was transferred to a Non-Executive post i.e., at M C and A, Bengaluru, as an Inspector of Excise. Thereafter, she was retransferred to Vijayanagar Range, Bengaluru and further transferred and posted to the post of Inspector of Excise, Adugodi Range, Bengaluru vide order dated 05.12.2018. It is alleged that respondent No.2 vide order dated 29.05.2020 has again transferred the petitioner from the post of Inspector of Excise, Adugodi Range, Bengaluru South District to KSBL Depot, Sakalawara Depot2, Bengaluru. Respondent No.3 Mr. Suresh R.O. has been transferred to the place of the petitioner. Aggrieved by the order dated 29.05.2020, the petitioner had preferred Application No.1793/2020 before the Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal at Bengaluru (‘Tribunal’ for short). The Tribunal has rejected the said application along with Application No.1792/2020 vide common order dated 23.06.2020. Aggrieved by the said order of the Tribunal, the petitioner is before this Court.
Facts in Writ Petition No.8641/2020
3. The petitioner Smt. Hemavathi C.H. joined the service of the State of Karnataka in the Department of Excise as Sub-Inspector by direct recruitment on 15.11.2011. After completion of her training period, in the month of May 2012, she was posted at Shivamogga as Sub-Inspector of Excise and has served in various other posts during her tenure of service. That on 28.01.2019 by an order of respondent No.2, the petitioner was transferred and posted to the post of Inspector of Excise, Sampangiramanagara Range, Bengaluru South District. It is averred that again vide order dated 29.05.2020, respondent No.2 has prematurely transferred the petitioner from the post of Inspector of Excise, Sampangiramanagara, Bengaluru South District to United Spirit Kumbalgodu, Bengaluru Urban District. Challenging the said order of transfer, an application was preferred by the petitioner in Application No.1792/2020 before the Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal at Bengaluru. The Tribunal has rejected the said application as devoid of merits vide common order dated 23.06.2020 along with Application No.1793/2020. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner is before this Court.
Submissions of the petitioners:
4. The posting of a Government servant from one office to another within the same headquarters to take up the duties of a new post would be a ’transfer’ within the meaning of Clause 3(d) of the Transfer Guidelines dated 07.06.2013 issued by the Government of Karnataka. The petitioners are Group C employees and therefore are entitled to continue in the post of Inspector of Excise, Adugodi Range (Smt. Kavitha B.L.) and Sampangiramanagara Range (Smt. Hemavathi C.H.) till they complete four years of service from 05.12.2018 and 28.01.2019 respectively. The impugned order is premature in nature as the petitioners are entitled to hold the post until they complete four years of tenure.
5. Learned Senior Counsel Sri. A.S. Ponnanna contended that the order of transfer is contrary to the Transfer Guidelines dated 07
