Back
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
DEBANGSU BASAK, MD. SHABBAR RASHIDI
Kalyan Pramanik – Appellant
Versus
State Of West Bengal – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. writ petition against transfer order. (Para 1 , 17 , 18) |
| 2. petitioner alleges financial irregularities and mala fides. (Para 2 , 4 , 10) |
| 3. arguments on the implications of the transfer order. (Para 7 , 8 , 11 , 14) |
| 4. court evaluates legal principles on repatriation. (Para 21 , 22 , 27) |
| 5. decision permits repatriation without stigma. (Para 30 , 32) |
JUDGMENT :
1. The writ petition is directed against an order dated July 30, 2024 passed by the West Bengal Administrative Tribunal in OA 352 of 2024.
3. By the impugned order, learned Tribunal, directed that the Original Application be placed for hearing on January 7, 2025. Learned Tribunal did not grant any interim relief to the writ petitioner.
5. In this writ petition, from time to time, co-ordinate Bench passed diverse orders.
7. Learned advocate appearing for the writ petitioner submits that the writ petitioner is a whistle blower. No doubt, the writ petitioner was an employee of the Finance Department but he was sent on deputation to Bally Municipality. He refers to the demerger of two municipalities. He submits that the writ petitioner came across financial irregularities in the affairs of the demerged municipality.
The court emphasized the need for proper justification in repatriation requests and clarified that speculative fears of disciplinary actions must be addressed through appropriate legal processes.
The court ruled that repatriation during ongoing litigation violates interim orders, necessitating reinstatement.
A deputationist has no vested right to continue on deputation and can be repatriated by following due procedures as per the DOPT guidelines.
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 transfer was not punitive, and the transfer policy did not confer a legally enforceable right.
An employee on deputation is to be repatriated if the borrowing department opts not to absorb them, but personal circumstances must be considered in determining their subsequent posting.
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.
Service Law - Post of Presenting Officer – Sought to Direct respondent to continue petitioner on deputation till expiry of this remaining tenure as extended by the Competent Authority with all conseq....
The main legal point established is that repatriation can be justified based on unsatisfactory performance and an employee's own undertaking, and the requirement of a three months' notice may not app....
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
