IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
ANIRUDDHA ROY, J.
Mithun Chakrabortty & Ors. - Appellant
Vs.
The State of West Bengal & Ors. - Respondent
W.P.A. 14686 of 2025
Decided On : 25-08-2025
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. engagement of petitioners under contractual basis. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 2. lack of provision for transfer in contract. (Para 10 , 11 , 12 , 13) |
| 3. state's argument on transfer rights. (Para 14 , 15 , 16 , 17) |
| 4. transfer policy incorporation in contracts. (Para 26 , 27 , 28 , 29) |
| 5. court's view on contractual terms regarding transfer. (Para 30 , 31 , 32 , 33) |
| 6. dismissal of writ petition. (Para 34 , 35 , 36) |
JUDGMENT :
Aniruddha Roy, J.
FACTS :
1. The petitioners pursuant to the recruitment notices issued in the year 2006, 2018 and 2021, participated in the recruitment process and ultimately they were engaged for the post of District Accounts Manager (for short the said post) on contractual basis at the respective districts for the Programme Management Unit (PMU) under RCH-II which is a component of National Rural Health Mission.
2. The appointment was purely contractual against a monthly consolidated remuneration initially for a period of 11 months, as would be evident from the engagement letter Annexure P-2 at page 22 to the writ petition.
3. The contractual period of the petitioners was extended from time to time and accordingly, the engagement of the petitioners was renewed. At no point of time either in the engagement letter or during the time of renewal, no condition for transfer of employee was imposed by the authority. The petitioners do not receive any house rent allowance, provident fund benefit, pension, gratuity or any social security including terminal benefits.
4. There has been no condition of employment of the petitioners, either express or implied that the West Bengal State Health and Family Welfare Samity or District Health and Family Welfare Samity or Block Health and Family Welfare Samity has any right to transfer the petitioners from their place of engagement to any other place.
5. Suddenly on June 25, 2025, the Mission Director, National Health Mission and Executive Director, West Bengal Health and Family Welfare Samity (for short the Welfare Samity) issued a transfer order dated June 25, 2025, Annexure P-4 at page 41 to the writ petition, in exercise of authority under Clause 1.3 of the Transfer Guideline dated May 26, 2022, Annexure P-5 at page 44 to the writ petition.
6. The petitioners alleged that prior to issuance of the said transfer order dated June 25, 2025, the petitioners were not aware of about any transfer Guideline nor the petitioners were made aware of the same at the time of their engagement or during the renewal of their contractual employment.
7. On the basis of the said impugned transfer order, the petitioners were directed to shift at the transferred place without any further or additional benefit.
8. Thus, the petitioners being aggrieved with the said transfer order dated June 25, 2025, has filed the instant writ petition with the following prayers :-
a) Writ of ог in the nature of Mandamus Commanding and/or directing the respondents, their men, agents, subordinates and each one of them to cancel, rescind and/or withdraw the Order being Memo No. HFW-27099/444/2024/1616 dated 25.06.2025 issued by the Mission Director, NHM and Executive Director, West Bengal State Health and Family Welfare Samity, immediately;
b) Writ of or in the nature of Mandamus Commanding and/or directing the respondents, their men, agents, subordinates and each one of them not to give effect and/or further effect of the Transfer Guideline of Contractual HR under National Health Mission, West Bengal issued by the Executive Director, West Bengal State Health and Family Welfare Samity & Mission Director, National Health Mission, West Bengal vide Memo No. HFW/NHM-466/2020/Pt-1/356 dated 26.05.2022 petitioners; in respect of the petitioners;
c) A writ of or in the nature of Certiorari calling upon the respondents to produce before the Hon’ble Court all the records relating to and arising out of the present case and upon perusal of such records conscionable justice may be done to the Petitioner by iss
Rajendra Singh and Others vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and Others
State of Rajasthan vs. Anand Prakash Solanki
Contractual employees can be subject to transfer if explicitly stated in their employment contract, limiting rights akin to permanent employees.
Judicial review of transfer orders is limited; absence of a defined transfer policy renders such orders arbitrary, necessitating formulation of a policy.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the prohibition of inter-district transfer under NHM Policy and the locality-specific nature of contractual engagements under NHM.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that a contractual employee without a permanent post cannot be transferred or detailed to a different place of posting.
Transfer orders within a corporation are valid administrative actions and do not require statutory regulations, affirming the limited scope of judicial review in such matters.
Judicial review of transfer orders is limited; transfers made on administrative grounds are valid unless shown to be arbitrary or malicious.
Transfer decisions may prioritize administrative needs over statutory rights; executive guidelines do not impose enforceable rights upon employees regarding transfer policies.
Administrative transfers are not subject to judicial review unless issued by an incompetent authority or based on mala fides, reaffirming the principle that employees cannot claim a right to remain i....
The court affirmed that transfer orders are administrative decisions and should not be interfered with unless proven to be arbitrary or in violation of statutory provisions.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.