The main legal point established is that the employer's right to transfer employees as per administrative requirements and the limited scope of interference by the Courts in transfer matters, unless malafides are established or there is a violation of statutory rules or policies.

JUDGMENT

Amit Bansal, J. - C.M. No. 12960/2021 (for exemption)

1. Allowed, subject to just exceptions and as per extant rules.

2. The application stands disposed of.

L.P.A 139/2021 with C.M. No. 12961/2021(for ad interim stay), C.M. No. 12962/2021(for seeking leave to file lengthy synopsis and lengthy list of dates) & C.M. No. 12963/2021(for placing on record additional documents)

1. The present intra Court appeal impugns the judgment dated 4th January, 2021, passed in W.P.(C) No. 9039/2020 and order dated 5 th March, 2021, passed in review petition no. 18/2021 in W.P.(C) No. 9039/2020. Vide the impugned judgment, the learned Single Judge has dismissed the writ petition filed by the appellant against the transfer order dated 22nd October, 2020 passed by the respondents, transferring the appellant to National Thermal Power Corporation (NTPC) Kudgi, Karnataka for being posted in the Safety Department of the respondent. Subsequent review petition filed by the appellant for the review of the aforesaid impugned judgment has also been dismissed by the learned Single Judge vide order dated 5th March, 2021.

2. The appellant was offered appointment to the post of Scientist at E4 level on 22nd March, 2005 by the respondents. On 3rd February, 2009, the Energy Technology (ET) Department of NTPC and its R&D Department were merged together to form a new department called NTPC Energy Technology Research Alliance (NETRA), Greater Noida. On 26th February, 2010, appellant was promoted to the level of E5 with effect from 1st January, 2010 and vide Circular dated 21st August, 2012, appellant was redesignated as Senior Manager in NETRA. Vide order dated 14th July, 2015, the appellant was transferred to Operations and Maintenance Department (Mechanical Maintenance), KBUNL, Kanti, Bihar. The appellant protested against the said transfer and his representations not being successful, the appellant filed a petition before this Court, being W.P.(C) No.738/2016 challenging the said transfer. Since no interim order was passed in his favour, appellant joined the place of his posting and the writ petition filed by the appellant was disposed of as having become infructuous vide order dated 23rd May, 2016. The LPA filed by the appellant, being LPA No. 380/2016 was dismissed on 3rd June, 2016, insofar as the challenge to the transfer order was concerned, and the SLP(C) No. 20295/2016 filed by the appellant against the same was also dismissed vide order dated 5th August, 2016.

3. The appellant made another representation on 19th December, 2017 seeking his transfer to NETRA and which representation not being considered favourably, the appellant preferred W.P.(C) 11382/2018 before this Court. The said petition was disposed of vide order dated 22nd October, 2018 directing NTPC to decide the representation within four weeks. The said representation having been rejected vide order dated 21st November, 2018, the petitioner once again approached this Court by filing W.P.(C) 1289/2019. The said petition was disposed of by this Court on 6th February, 2020 directing NTPC to consider the representations that may be filed by the petitioner and take appropriate steps with regard to his posting. The said representation having been preferred by the petitioner on 18th February, 2020, was once against rejected by NTPC vide order dated 15th April, 2020.

4. Another transfer order dated 22nd October, 2020 was issued by NTPC transferring the appellant to Kudgi, Karnataka as Senior Manager in the Safety Department of NTPC, followed by a release order dated 28th October, 2020. The appellant filed a representation dated 28th October, 2020 against the said transfer order, which not having been considered, the petitioner approached this Court by filing the writ petition, from which the present appeal arises.

5. The main grounds of challenge before the learned Single Judge were as follows:-

(i) The appellant was appointed as a Scientist based on certain specialized qualifications, but on transf