SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Pat) 1509

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
HARISH KUMAR, J.
Dr. Geeta Kumari, wife of Sri Abhay Kumar Bharti – Appellant
Versus
Dr. Rajendra Prasad Central Agricultural University, Pusa, - Respondent
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.11716 of 2025
Decided on : 11-09-2025

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner:Mr. Shivendra Kishore, Sr. Advocate Mr. Saroj Kumar, Advocate
For the Respondent:Mr. P. K. Shahi, Sr. Advocate Mr. Vijay Shankar Upadhyay, Advocate

The Vice-Chancellor of the university lacks the authority to transfer employees absent explicit provisions in the governing Act, rendering the transfer order invalid.

Headnote:(A) Dr. Rajendra Prasad Central Agricultural University Act, 2016 - Section 12 - Transfer of university employees - The transfer order issued by the Vice-Chancellor was deemed unauthorized as there was no specific provision empowering the Vice-Chancellor for such actions under the Act - Hence, the court found the transfer order was non-est in the eye of law - Petitioner's status and role were adversely affected by the transfer, and the court determined the transferring authority should have been the Board of Management based on the provisions of the Act. (Paras 5, 21, 40)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner challenged her transfer from Assistant Professor at the University to a position at the Banana Research Centre, arguing that there was no available post for her and that the transfer was punitive and unauthorized. (Paras 2, 4)

Findings of Court:
The court ruled that the Vice-Chancellor lacked jurisdiction to issue the transfer order without explicit powers delegated in the Act, leading to the quashing of the transfer. (Paras 40, 41)

Issues: The primary issues addressed included the authority of the Vice-Chancellor to transfer university employees and whether the transfer order was punitive. (Paras 21, 40)

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the power of transfer is not implicit under the Vice-Chancellor's general supervisory role and stressed that without explicit legislative provision, the transfer was invalid. The judgment reinforced that transfers in public service are generally at the discretion of the appointing authority. (Paras 20, 39)

Result: Writ petition allowed; transfer order set aside.

Table of Content
1. petitioner's transfer and relieving order challenged. (Para 1 , 2 , 3)
2. transfer order alleged to reduce petitioner's status. (Para 4 , 10)
3. act and statutes detailing powers and authority. (Para 5 , 6 , 9)
4. board of management holds transfer authority. (Para 8 , 18)
5. judicial review limited; transfer is employer's domain. (Para 20 , 21 , 36)
6. impugned transfer order set aside; petition allowed. (Para 40 , 43)

JUDGMENT :

HARISH KUMAR, J.

1. This Court has heard Mr. Shivendra Kishore, learned Senior Advocate duly assisted by Mr. Saroj Kumar, learned Advocate for the petitioner and Mr. P. K. Shahi, learned Senior Advocate along with Mr. Vijay Shankar Upadhyay, learned Advocate for the Dr. Rajendra Prasad Central Agricultural University.

2. The brief facts, leading to the present writ petition are summarized; that while the petitioner was discharging her duties on the post of Assistant Professor in the Department of Microbiology, faculty of Basic Science & Humanities, Dr. Rajendra Prasad Central Agricultural University, Pusa (hereinafter referred to as ‘the University’), the Deputy Registrar (Estt.) of the University issued Office Order No. 76 dated 18.05.2025 with the approval of the competent authority, whereby the petitioner was transferred to Banana Research Centre, Goroul, Vaishali. In subsequent to the aforenoted order of transfer, the Dean, College of Basic Science & Humanities of the University issued Officer Order No. 20 dated 28.05.2025 relieved the petitioner w.e.f. 28.05.2025 to submit her joining in Banana Research Centre, Goroul, Vaishali.

3. The aforementioned order of transfer and the consequential relieving order are put to challenge by invoking the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India on various grounds, noted hereinbelow.

4. Mr. Shivendra Kishore, learned Senior Advocate for the petitioner while assailing the impugned orders submitted that the order of transfer, in fact, amounting to reduction of the status of the petitioner and thereby punitive in nature. At Banana Research Centre, Goroul, Vaishali (hereinafter referred to as ‘the BRC, Goroul’) the post of Assistant Professor, Department of Microbiology is not available. The impugned order of transfer also does not suggest as to on what post the petitioner has to discharge her responsibility at BRC, Goroul. There would be no utility of the services of the petitioner in absence of teaching facility at Goroul. On the contrary, the role of the petitioner serving as Principal Investigator of University funded project for a period of three years vide Office Order Dated 21.09.2024 shall be adversely affected due to transfer of the petitioner mid way within the period of three years. The Academic supervision of 11 M.Sc. (Agriculture) students and 3 Ph.D. scholars will also be adversely affected due to impugned order of transfer and relieving.

5. Dr. Rajendra Prasad Central Agricultural University Act , 2016 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act, 2016’) is duly enacted by the Parliament and published in the Gazette of India on 28.05.2016 by repealing the Bihar Agricultural University Act, 1987. Section 12 (1) of the Act, 2016 provides that the Vice-Chancellor shall be appointed by the Visitor in such manner as may be prescribed by the Statutes. It is further contended that (2) provided that Vice-Chancellor shall be the principal executive and academic officer of the University and shall exercise general supervision and control over the affairs of the University and give effect to the decisions of all the authorities of the University.

6. The Statutes describe the powers and duties of the Vice-Chancellor; Under Statute 3(4), the Vice-Chancellor is empowered to exercise control over the affairs of the University and shall give effect to the decisions of all the authorities of the University. Besides all the powers necessary for the discipline in the University, the Vice-Chancellor shall have the powe

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top