Back
1993 Supreme(Gau) 81
GAUHATI HIGH COURT
S.K.Homchaudhuri, J.
Nurul Islam -Appellant
Versus
State of Assam and Ors. -Respondent
Civil Revision No. 2416 of 1992
Decided On : 31-03-1993
D.N.Choudhary, S.A.Laskar, R.P.Sharma, I.B.Das, H.K.Baishya, B.D.Goswami, H.N.Sharma
Policy decision of the government regarding transfer of government servants should be followed by all appointing authorities fairly and impartially.
Headnote:
TRANSFER OF GOVERNMENT SERVANTS - POLICY DECISION - ARBITRARY EXERCISE OF POWER - POLICY DECISION OF THE GOVERNMENT AS REGARDS TRANSFER MAY NOT CONFER STATUTORY RIGHT TO A GOVERNMENT SERVANT TO ENFORCE THE SAME IN A COURT OF LAW, BUT THE POLICY DECISION BASED ON EQUITY AND JUSTICE, SHOULD BE FOLLOWED BY ALL APPOINTING AUTHORITIES FAIRLY AND IMPARTIALLY AND SHOULD NOT BE DISREGARDED AND FLOUTED AT SWEET WILL.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, a Veterinary Assistant Surgeon (VAS), was transferred from Krishnai to Manikpur. He challenged the transfer order, arguing that it was arbitrary and unjust. The respondent No. 5, who was transferred from Balijana to Krishnai, also filed a writ petition challenging his transfer order. However, he later withdrew the petition after the impugned order dated 14.10.92 was passed, restoring his original posting at Krishnai.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the frequent transfers of the petitioner and respondent No. 5 were arbitrary and unjust. The court also found that the policy decision of the government regarding transfer of government servants was not being followed by the appointing authorities.
Issues: 1. Whether the transfer order dated 14.10.92 was arbitrary and unjust? 2. Whether the policy decision of the government regarding transfer of government servants was being followed by the appointing authorities?
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the transfer order dated 14.10.92 was arbitrary and unjust. The court also held that the policy decision of the government regarding transfer of government servants was not being followed by the appointing authorities. The court further held that the policy decision of the government, though not conferring any statutory right to a government servant to enforce the same in a court of law, should be followed by all appointing authorities fairly and impartially.
Final Decision: The court disposed of the petition with the following directions to respondent No.2, the Commissioner and Secretary to the Govt. of Assail, Veterinary Department: (i) to reconsider the impugned order dated 14.10.92 so far it purports transfer of the petitioner to Manikpur and to see whether first order of transfer so far the petitioner is concerned can be restored or not, and if not, whether the petitioner can be posted either at Rongjuli or at Dudnoi, if the incumbents holding posts in those stations have already completed 3 years service in the same station; (ii) the petitioner may also file a representation afresh to the respondent No. 2 within 15 days from today; (iii) to pass appropriate order by treating the petitioner attached to Krishnai Veterinary Dispensary as Additional VAS, so as to facilitate payment of salary to the petitioner during period from November, 1992 to the date of passing appropriate order of posting as directecd above; (iv) the respondent No. 2 shall pass appropriate orders in the light of the aforesaid directions within a period of one month from the date of receipt of the order. It is made clear that respondent No. 5 shall be entitled to his duty pay on and from the date he reported for duties at Krishnai.
2. Petitioner's case is that whj|e tie was working as Veterinary Assistant Surgeon (in short VAS) ,at Chapar Veterinary Dispensary, by order dated 22.5.92 he was transferred and posted to Kazigaon vice Dr. R Islam, VAS, Kazigapn transferred to Chapar. The petitioner handed over the charge of Chapar Veterinary Dispensary on 9.6.92 to Dr. R, Islam in pursuant to the order of transfer dated 22.5.92. However, by order dated 10.6.92, the order of transfer dated 22,5.92 was modified and the petitioner was posted as Extension Officer, Veterinary at Rangjuli vice Dr. SR Paul, VAS, Rangjuli was transferred and posted at Kazigabn. Dr. SR Paul having refused to handover charge, by order dated 18.6.92 petitioner was transferred and posted as VAS, Krishnai Veterinary Dispensary vice Dr. SR Choudhury, VAS, Krishnai transferred and posted as VAS, Goalpara. The petitioner reported for duties at Krishnai, but as Dr. SR Choudhury did not handover charge to him the petitioner had to take charge unilaterally on 29.6.92 of the Krishnai Veterinary Dispensary. By order dated 6.7 92, the Govt. extended the joining time of the petitioner for a period of 18 days with effect from 10:6.92. Again on 14.10.92 in partial modification of the earlier order dated 18.6.92, the petitioner has been transferred to Manikpur Veterinary Dispensary. The petitioner's representation before the respondent No. 2, the Commissioner , and Secretary, Veterinary and Animal Husbandary Department, Govt. of Assam to reconsider the order of transfer dated 14.1Q£2. having been rejected by order dated 5.11.92, the petitioner has approached this Court in this writ petition.
3. While issuing Rule on 10.11 92, this Court passed ad-interim order directing that the impugned order dated 14.10.92 transferring.the petitioner to Manikpur and the order dated 5.11-.92 rejecting the reprerentation should not be given effect to, if not already given effect to.
4. After receipt of the notice, the respondent No. 5 has filed an application for modification/alteration and/or vacation of the interim order which has been registered as Misc. Case No, ,116 of 1992 in this petition. In the application for modification, the respondent No. 5 has stated thai while he was working as Extension Officer,, Veterinary Department at Balijana, he was transferred as VAS at, Krishnai Veterinary Hospital by order dated 10.6.92 vice Dr. SR Choudhury, VAS, I£risjtm3i Veterinary Dispensary transferred to GoaJpara.In pursuant to the the transfer order, thp respondent }sfo, 5 reported for duties at Krishnai on 19.6.92 <and took over-, charge from Dr. SR Choudhury. After he joined a£ Krishnai he received the notification dated 18.6.92 pn 23.6.92 purporting- to transfer him Jo Manakpjur Veterinary Dispensary. Against the order qf transfer to Manikpur th$ respondent No. 5 made a representation to the Govt. and thereafter the Govt. by another notification dated 14.7.92, transferred the respondent No. 5 to Dudnoi Veterinary Dispensary, vice Dr. Sarat Nath, VAS, Dudnoi, transferred. Dr. Sarat Nath obtained a stay order from the Govt. and the respondent No. 5 could not join at Dudnoi. Under the circumstances, the respondent No. 5 filed a writ petition in this Court with the prayer for issuance of a direction to allow him to continue to work at Krishna!. The said writ petition was -registered as Civil Rule No. 1643 of 1992. During the pendency of the writ petition, the Govt. by order dated 14.10.92 modified the earlier order dated 18.6.92 and posted the respondent No. 5 at Krishna!. According to respondent No. 5 he reported for duties on 15.10.92 and also submitted a form of reporting and taking over charge as provided under Rule 145 of the Assam Financial Rules, but the relieving officer, namely, the petitioner, refused to sign in the form and thereafter kept himself away from the of
