Orders of transfer for the exigency of service are not liable to be interfered with unless in violation of statutory rules or done in mala fide exercise of powers. Allegations of mala fide must be supported by substantial materials.

JUDGMENT :

Heard Shri A. Tatak, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Shri S. Tapin, learned Senior Government Advocate, AP.

2. Considering the subject matter involved and the fact that necessary pleadings have been exchanged, this writ petition is taken up for disposal at the admission stage.

3. The petitioner, who is a casual staff under the Office of the PWD has put to challenge two orders of transfer. The first order is dated 31.07.2023 whereby she has been transferred from Boleng Division to Yingkiong Division and by the subsequent order dated 16.08.2023, she has again been re-posted in the Tuting Sub-Division.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that apart from the fact that frequent transfers are not permissible in law, the impugned action is of the behest of the local MLA, who has also been made a party respondent in the present case. He submits that the entire action is triggered after filing of a writ petition being WP(C)/284/2023 by a group of persons which included the husband of the petitioner in connection with a Hydel Power Project and the contentions was that the local villagers were not consulted and the Project would adversely affect their life. It is further submitted that this Court had also passed an interim order in that case. It is the projected that since the local MLA was interested in the project, he took a grudge against the petitioners in that case and since the husband of the present petitioner was one of the party, the petitioner is now having required to face the brunt.

5. It is submitted that there is no public interest attached with the impugned transfer inasmuch as, within a very short time of 3 to 4 days of joining, the Yingkiong Division pursuant to the first order of transfer dated 31.07.2023, the petitioner was again re-posted to Tuting Sub-Division vide an order dated 16.08.2023. It is also submitted that apprehending some penal action, the petitioner had joined the Yingkiong Division whereafter the second impugned order was passed.

6. Shri Tatak, learned counsel for the petitioner has however informed that vide an order dated 29.08.2023, this Court while issuing notice had stayed both the impugned orders of transfer pursuant to which, the petitioner is continuing her service as Casual Staff at the Boleng Division.

7. The learned counsel for the petitioner has however fairly conceded that the petitioner has completed more than 7 years at Boleng Division but that factor was not the consideration for her transfer which has been done according to the petitioner with mala fide intention.

8. Per contra, Shri S. Tapin, learned Senior Government Advocate, AP by referring to the affidavit-in-opposition filed on 30.10.2023 has submitted that there is no allegations at all of violation of any Rules governing the service condition in connection with the impugned orders of transfer. It is submitted that the petitioner has completed about 8 years at Boleng Division and therefore, it is in the interest of public that the orders of transfer has been passed which is also in accordance with the OM dated 13.08.2007. The learned State Counsel has specifically referred to clause 12 of the said OM which relates to transfer and posting.

9. With regard to the submission of frequent transfer, the learned State Counsel has clarified that Boleng Division and Yingkiong Division of the PWD falls under the Boleng Circle and the order of transfer dated 31.07.2023 was issued by the competent authority namely, the Superintending Engineer of the Circle. Shri Tapin clarifies that the subsequent order dated 16.08.2023 is not an order of transfer but only an order of posting of the petitioner in Tuting which is Sub-Division under the Yingkiong Division and that order has been passed by the competent authority namely, the Executive Engineer of the Yingkiong Divison.

10. Countering the allegation of mala fide by which the petitioner has tried to rope in the role of the local MLA, learned State Counsel submi