IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
SUMAN SHYAM, J.
Jyotish Das S/o Lt. Sona Ram Das - Appellant
Versus
The State Of Assam And Ors. – Respondent
WP(C) 4203 of 2023
Decided on : 28-07-2023
Transfer - Premature Transfer - Food & Civil Supplies - Assam Services (Pension) Rules, 1969 - Rule 95
Fact of the Case:
The writ petitioner, a Deputy Director of Food & Civil Supplies, challenged his transfer order on the grounds of premature transfer, proximity to retirement, and personal difficulties. The petitioner's wife submitted a representation highlighting the family's difficulties due to the transfer.
Finding of the Court:
The Court found that the transfer order was issued under the direction and with the approval of the Chief Minister, Assam, and in accordance with the government's policy. The Court also noted that there was no statutory provision or policy requiring an officer to be posted in his home district before retirement. The Court directed the departmental authority to examine the representation submitted by the petitioner's wife and dispose of it within two weeks.
Issues: Premature transfer, proximity to retirement, personal difficulties, consideration of family's difficulties by departmental authorities.
Ratio Decidendi: The Court held that the scope for the Writ Court to interfere with an order of transfer is extremely limited, and a transfer order can only be interfered with if issued in violation of statutory provisions or with a malafide intent. The Court also emphasized that there was no statutory provision or policy requiring an officer to be posted in his home district before retirement.
Final Decision: The writ petition was disposed of, and the departmental authority was directed to examine the representation submitted by the petitioner's wife and dispose of it within two weeks. The interim order dated 26.07.2023 was modified accordingly, and there was no order as to cost.
JUDGMENT :
Heard Ms. B. Bhuyan, learned senior counsel assisted by Ms. R. S. Deuri, learned counsel appearing for the writ petitioner. Also heard Mr. R. Dhar, learned Additional Senior Government Advocate, Assam appearing on behalf of the respondents.
2. The writ petitioner herein is serving as Deputy Director of Food & Civil Supplies and Consumer Affairs and is presently posted at Kamrup Sadar in the District of Kamrup(M). Assailing the transfer order dated 21.07.2023 by means of which, he has been transferred and posted at Haflong, the instant writ petition has been filed inter-alia contending that this is a case of premature transfer in as much as the petitioner is yet to complete two years in his present place of posting. The other grounds urged by the petitioner’s counsel are that the petitioner is due for retirement on attaining the age of superannuation with effect from 30.04.2025 and therefore, he has less than two years to go for his retirement. Under the circumstances, in order to avoid any delay in finalization of his pension, the petitioner ought to be posted in his home district i.e. Kamrup(M), which has not been done in the present case. Finally, Ms. Bhuyan has argued that the petitioner is facing certain personal difficulties as a result of which he is unable to shift out of Guwahati at this stage. The learned counsel submits that highlighting the difficulties faced by the petitioner, his wife Smt. Sabita Das had submitted a representation before the departmental Secretary on 25.07.2023 (Annexure-G) but the same has not been considered till today. It is also the submission of Ms. Bhuyan that a premature transfer could not have been effected without the approval of the Chief Minister, Assam.
3. By relying upon a decision rendered by the High Court of Judicature at Rajasthan in the case of Smt. Rani Jain Vs. Secretary and Transport Commissioner, Govt. of Rajasthan & others rendered in Civil Writ Petition No.6971/2019 Ms. Bhuyan has argued that an order of transfer, shifting the incumbent out of the home district just before retirement, is liable to be interfered with on such count alone.
4. Taking note of the submissions made by the petitioner’s counsel, this Court had passed order dated 26.07.2023 directing the Government Advocate, Assam to obtain instruction and also to produce the relevant records. In the meantime, status-quo was directed to be maintained. Accordingly, the petitioner is continuing in his present place of posting till today.
5. When the matter is called up before this Court today, Mr. Dhar, learned Addl. Sr. Govt. Advocate, Assam appearing for the respondents has produced written instructions along with supporting documents to submit that as per the policy decision of the Government as many as 142 officers in the department of Food & Civil Supplies, Government of Assam have been transferred with the help of a randomized application of the NIC. Mr. Dhar has further submitted that the transfer orders have been issued under the direction and with the approval of the Hon’ble Chief Minister, Assam. The learned departmental counsel has also placed the relevant documentary evidence in support of his contention that this is a case of series transfers effected in the exigencies of public service based on system operated orders without any human intervention. Mr. Dhar has also invited the attention of this Court to the policy decision of the Government to transfer officers rendering two or more years of service in a particular place by shifting them to a different zone and also not to allow any officer to remain in his home district. According to Mr. Dhar, the exercise of reshuffle is aimed at enhancing the efficiency of the departmental machinery and therefore, there is no good ground for this Court to interfere with the transfer order. Mr. Dhar has also produced a copy of the Gradation List of Assistant Directors, Food & Civil Supplies and Consumer Affairs Department, as on 20.09.2021, to show that the home
The legal principle established is that the scope for the Writ Court to interfere with an order of transfer is extremely limited, and a transfer order can only be interfered with if issued in violati....
Government servants have no vested right to remain posted at a particular place, and interference with transfer orders should be limited to cases of mala fides or violation of specific provisions.
Transfer orders within government service are generally not subject to judicial review unless proven malafide or in violation of statutory provisions.
Transfer of an employee is an exigency of service and should not be interfered with unless it is mala fide or in violation of statutory provisions.
Transfers of employees nearing retirement must be justified by administrative exigency; otherwise, they are deemed arbitrary and against public policy.
Consideration of impending retirement and balance between administrative exigency and personal inconvenience in transfer orders.
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.