Back
ANIL KUMAR UPADHYAY
Prof. Shailendra Kumar – Appellant
Versus
Chancellor – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the respondents.
2. Petitioners are aggrieved by the order of transfer.
3. Transfer of employee is an incidence of service. It is not the case of the petitioners that the posts they are holding, are not transferable within the zone of University. It is also not the case of the petitioners that the authority passed the order of transfer lacks jurisdiction.
4. The grievance of petitioner nos. 1 and 3 is that the authorities have transferred them without following the norms.
5. So far as petitioner no. 2 is concerned, learned counsel submits that petitioner no.2 has already retired from service.
6. Without going into the merit of the case, the writ application is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner nos. 1 and 3 to represent the Hon'ble Chancellor of the Universities for consideration of their cases.
7. In case, such representation is filed by petitioners before the Hon'ble Chancellor, who shall examine the case of the petitioners and pass reasonable order within a maximum period of six months from the date of receipt of such representation along with a copy of this order.
8. It goes without saying that the respondents shall ta
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....
Court upheld transfer of university faculty under administrative grounds, affirming limited scope for judicial review in administrative transfer matters.
Government servants have no vested right to remain posted at a place of their choice and can be transferred in administrative exigencies, and the courts should not interfere with transfer orders made....
Transfer of an employee is an essential condition of service and can only be interfered with in exceptional circumstances. Courts have limited jurisdiction to interfere in transfer matters.
The court upheld the administrative authority's discretion in transfer orders while ensuring the employee's right to raise grievances through representation.
The Vice Chancellor lacks jurisdiction to transfer staff without Board approval under the Act of 2016, allowing for statutory appeal rights.
A transfer order executed without adhering to due process is deemed punitive and illegal, impacting the employee’s rights and entitlements.
Point of law : No government employee can be transferred before he completes the minimum period of retention as prescribed in Government Order dated 07.06.2013 -greater leverage with the Government i....
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
