IN THE HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI
Arun Chandra Upadhyay, J.
Sunit Kumar Bardoloi - Appellants
Vs.
State of Assam and Ors. - Respondent
WP (C) No. 3739 of 2009
Decided On: 31.03.2010
Constitution of India , 1950 - Article 226 – Employment and service matter - Working as Assistant Executive Engineer - Transfer order - Challenged - Respondent No. 2 by impugned order dated transferred Petitioner from Mechanical Sub-Division to Upper Assam Drilling Division (I) - In same capacity within six months from date of earlier transfer - Thus apparently, ho has not completed normal tenure of three years in present place of posting - On receiving transfer order, Petitioner submitted a representation before Respondent No. 2 requesting him to stay and/or modify said transfer order - However, Respondent No. 2 has not so far disposed of representation submitted by Petitioner - After election was over, some of the officers wanted to go back to their respective earlier places of postings - Petitioner, having come to know about such arrangements having been hatched by officers submitted application to Respondent No. 2 through Executive Engineer, Mechanical Division (Irrigation) on requesting not to transfer him from till completion of his normal tenure of three years in place of posting - Petitioner further stated that immediately after transfer order, he had submitted a representation apprising Respondent No. 2 regarding his difficulties in complying with said transfer order and requested to stay said transfer order - But representation was kept pending before Respondent No. 2 – Held, Petitioner has been able to establish that he was transferred from present place of posting only to accommodate Respondent No. 5 who was holding same post prior to his transfer - Over and above State Respondents did not file any affidavit to show extent of public interest involved and/or exigency of public service in transferring Respondent No. 5, immediately within six months to same place where he was previously posted - Above exercise on part of State Respondents apparently not in interest of public service obviously would only to serve political and/or personal interest of some individuals as reflected in the relevant file of the Department - Court have no hesitation to hold that the impugned order of transfer dated has been issued not in public interest but only to accommodate Respondent No. 5, and in the process of doing so aforesaid transfer guidelines though it may not have statutory force was violated - Consequently, entire exercise carried out by State Respondents being arbitrary and irregular impugned order of transfer dated stands set aside and quashed - It is made clear that interference with impugned transfer order dated - Petition allowed.
Arun Chandra Upadhyay, J.
1. Heard Mr. B.C. Das, learned senior counsel assisted by Mrs. R. Borah, learned Counsel for the Petitioner. Also heard Dr. B. Ahmed, learned standing counsel representing the Irrigation Department, Govt. of Assam as well as Mr. C. Baruah, learned Counsel for the Respondent No. 5.
2. By this application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the Petitioner has challenged the transfer order dated 28.08.2009 issued by the Respondent authority, on the ground of arbitrariness, lack of public interest and for being violative of the transfer policy formulated by the Government of Assam.
3. Facts leading to filing of this writ petition may be stated briefly as follows:
The Petitioner, is working as Assistant Executive Engineer at Sibsagar Mechanical Sub-Division at Sibsagar, since 18.02.2009. Prior to his posting at Sibsagar, Petitioner worked in Dibrugarh Mechanical Division (I), Dibrugarh, for more than three years and thereafter he was transferred to Sibsagar, just before the last general election.
4. The Respondent No. 2 by the impugned order dated 28.08.2009, transferred the Petitioner from Sibsagar Mechanical Sub-Division to Upper Assam Drilling Division (I). Jorhat in the same capacity within six months from the date of earlier transfer. Thus apparently, ho has not completed the normal tenure of three years in the present place of posting. On receiving the transfer order, the Petitioner submitted a representation before the Respondent No. 2, requesting him to stay and/or modify the said transfer order. However, the Respondent No. 2 has not so far disposed of the representation submitted by the Petitioner. It has been submitted on behalf of the Petitioner that since the Petitioner has not completed three years of normal tenure in his present place of posting, he could not have been transferred without obtaining the approval of the Hon'ble Chief Minister, Assam, in terms of the guidelines/instructions issued by the State Respondents regulating the transfer of Government employees.
5. The Petitioner submitted that the impugned transfer order was issued arbitrarily by Respondent No. 2 at the behest of some political leaders, without obtaining prior approval of the Chief Minister, Assam and in violation of the transfer policy of the State Government.
6. The Petitioner further submits that during the last general election, officers of the Irrigation Department were transferred by an order dated 18.02.2009, in terms of guidelines issued by the Election Commission of India. After the election was over, some of the officers wanted to go back to their respective earlier places of postings. The Petitioner, having come to know about such arrangements having been hatched by the officers, submitted application to the Respondent No. 2 through the Executive Engineer, Jorhat, Mechanical Division (Irrigation), on 05.06.2009, requesting not to transfer him from Sibsagar till completion of his normal tenure of three years in the place of posting. The Petitioner further stated that he was also given assurance by the Respondent No. 2 that there was no proposal to transfer him from the present place of posting.
Despite such assurances the Petitioner was transferred by issuing the impugned transfer order. The Petitioner further stated that immediately after the transfer order, he had submitted a representation apprising the Respondent No. 2 regarding his difficulties in complying with the said transfer order and requested to stay the said transfer order. But the representation was kept pending before the Respondent No. 2.
7. It is submitted on behalf of the Petitioner that on receipt of the copy of the transfer order dated 28.08.2009, issued by the Respondent No. 2, the Petitioner came to know that the Respondent No. 2 issued the impugned transfer order on 28.08.2009, transferring the Petitioner from Sibsagar to Jorhat against the post held by one Sri Anup Kumar Baruah (Respondent No. 5). The Petitioner could gather
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.