Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2023 Supreme(Kar) 714

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
E.S.Indiresh, J.
Mahantesh Nayak – Appellant
Versus
University Of Agricultural Sciences – Respondent
Writ Pettion No. 101373 of 2022 (S-Tr) C/W Writ Petition No. 103121 of 2022 &Writ Petition No. 100177 of 2023
Decided On : 13-02-2023

Advocates appeared:
Prashant S.Kadadevar, Advocate, Harsh Desai, Advocate, P.H.Hatti, Advocate, M.H.Patil, Advocate, K.L.Patil, Advocate

The main legal point established in the judgment is that transfer orders must be justified and not actuated by malafides or violation of statutory provisions. The judgment also emphasizes the limited scope of judicial review in transfer matters and the importance of proving misconduct in a manner known to law before issuing a transfer order on the ground of misconduct.

Headnote:
Transfer - University Transfer Orders - Karnataka Civil Service (Conduct) Rules - [7, 14] - The court considered the transfer orders issued by the respondent-University and found them to be malafide in nature, as they were passed with the intention to harass the petitioners who were office bearers of the Association. The court referred to the Karnataka Civil Service (Conduct) Rules, specifically clauses 7 and 14, which provide protection to office bearers of associations from being transferred from their place of work. The court highlighted the importance of proving misconduct in a manner known to law before issuing a transfer order on the ground of misconduct. The court also emphasized that the scope of judicial review in transfer matters is limited and justified only in cases of malafide or violation of statutory provisions.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners, who were office bearers of the Association, challenged the transfer orders issued by the respondent-University, alleging that the orders were passed with vindictiveness and malafide intention to harass them. The petitioners had been advocating for the welfare of teachers and had made demands to the University, which led to disciplinary actions and transfer orders against them.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the transfer orders were malafide in nature and were passed with the intention to harass the petitioners. The court also noted that the transfer orders were in violation of the Karnataka Civil Service (Conduct) Rules, which provide protection to office bearers of associations from being transferred from their place of work. The court emphasized the importance of proving misconduct in a manner known to law before issuing a transfer order on the ground of misconduct.
Issues: The issues before the court were whether the transfer orders were justifiable, whether the court had jurisdiction to interfere with transfer orders, and what order to pass in the case.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the transfer orders were malafide in nature and in violation of the Karnataka Civil Service (Conduct) Rules. The court emphasized the limited scope of judicial review in transfer matters and the importance of proving misconduct in a manner known to law before issuing a transfer order on the ground of misconduct.
Final Decision: The court set aside the impugned transfer orders and directed the respondent-University to pay a cost of litigation to the petitioners in each of the writ petitions.

JUDGMENT/ORDER

1. In these writ petitions, the petitioners herein have primarily challenged the order dtd. 1/4/2022 passed by the respondent-University transferring the petitioners to the various places. In W.P.No.101373/2022, the petitioners have challenged the order of transfer dtd. 1/4/2022. In W.P.No.101321/2022, petitioner has challenged the order dtd. 29/6/2022 passed by the 2nd respondent No.2 (Annexure-E) whereby, the respondent-university withdraw the petitioner as Head of the Department of Agricultural Meteorology, College of Agriculture, Dharwad and nominating one Dr. Sumesh to the said post. In W.P.No.100177/2023, petitioner has challenged the order dtd. 12/12/2022 (Annexure-A) regarding allotment of work.

2. It is the case of the petitioners that, petitioners are working in the respondent-University in the cadre of Professors as well as the Assistant Professors. The petitioner Nos.1 to 3 are the office bearers of the association for Teacher's welfare, University of Agricultural Science U.A.S. Dharwad (hereinafter referred to as 'Association'). Petitioner Nos.4 and 5 are the Executive Member of the Association. It is averred in the writ petition that, petitioners are collectively through its Association requested the respondent-University to fulfill the demands of the teachers of the University and in this regard, proceedings of the Association dtd. 23/8/2021 (Annexure-B), 7/11/2021 (Annexure-C), 30/9/2021 (Annexure-D), 2/10/2021 (Annexure-E), 3/10/2021 (Annexure-F) are produced. It is urged by the Association that, their demands have not been met by the respondentUniversity and therefore, they decided to go on agitation as per letter dtd. 3/10/2021 (Annexue-F). Meeting was also fixed on 29/10/2021 as per Annexure-G at Raj Bhavan, Bengaluru to ameliorate their dispute. In the meanwhile, the University has taken steps to appoint posts of Director and Dean in the University as per notification dtd. 23/11/2018 and same was challenged before this Court by the Association and this Court by order dtd. 4/12/2021 (Annexure-H) allowed the writ petition, consequently set aside the impugned notification empowering the respondent-University to appoint for the various posts. In the meanwhile, the petitioners were served with chargesheet dtd. 17/12/2021 as per Annexure-J to the writ petition. The petitioners have challenged the charge-sheet issued by the respondent-University in W.P.No.100145/2022 and this Court granted an interim order on 13/1/2022 (Annexure-K). Thereafter, the Governing Council of the University in its 59th meeting resolved to take disciplinary action against the employees, particularly noticing the activities of the petitioners herein in the Association. The respondent-University has also issued show cause notice dtd. 5/2/2022 to the petitioners herein seeking explanation from them alleging that their action which amounts to 'misconduct' under the Karnataka Civil Service (Conduct) Rules, vide Annexure-P series. It is the case of the petitioners that, the impugned transfer orders are passed by the respondent-University, with vindictiveness coupled with malafide in nature and to harass the petitioners accordingly, challenged the same in these writ petition.

3. Heard Sri. Prashant S. Kadadevar, and Sri. P.N.Hati, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri. Harsh Desai, learned Additional Government Advocate and Sri. K.L.Patil, learned counsel for the respective respondents.

4. Sri. Prashant S. Kadadevar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner contended that, the reason behind issuing the transfer order by the respondent- University, transferring the petitioners herein who were the office bearers of the Association is on account of the demand made by them on behalf of the Association and the impugned transfer order is with colorable exercise of power by the respondent-University. He further contended that, there is no public interest involved and the transfer of the petitioner is against the circular issued