Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI, ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH
LANUSUNGKUM JAMIR, KARDAK ETE, JJ.
Panpong Tangha, S/o. Late N. Tangha - Petitioner
Versus
The State of Arunachal Pradesh, Rep. by Chief Secretary to the Govt. of Arunachal Pradesh & Ors. - Respondents
WA No. 328 of 2023
Decided On : 27-02-2024
Transfer - Government Servant - Circular No.RPPTT-19/90 dated 02.06.1998 - Summary of Acts and Sections: Circular No.RPPTT-19/90 dated 02.06.1998 - The judgment discusses the violation of circular No.RPPTT-19/90 dated 02.06.1998, which regulates the transfer and posting of officers and staffs in Arunachal Pradesh. It also highlights the principles of malice in law and the relevance of statutory rules in the context of transfer orders.
Fact of the Case:
The appellant, a government servant, was transferred from PWD Longding Division to the Chief Engineer (HW) Zone Office, Itanagar, before completion of the normal tenure and 11 months before the due date of retirement. The appellant challenged the transfer on the grounds of being punitive in nature and violating the circular No.RPPTT-19/90 dated 02.06.1998.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the transfer order was issued in violation of the circular No.RPPTT-19/90 dated 02.06.1998 and was punitive in nature, as it was based on an irrelevant ground and without recourse to relevant proceedings under the law. The court also noted that the reasons for transfer provided by the respondent authority were contradictory and amounted to passing the transfer order by way of punishment.
Issues: The issues revolved around the legality of the transfer order, its compliance with the circular No.RPPTT-19/90 dated 02.06.1998, and whether the transfer was punitive in nature.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the transfer order violated the circular No.RPPTT-19/90 dated 02.06.1998 and was passed in lieu of punishment, which was not permissible under the law.
Final Decision: The court set aside and quashed the impugned transfer order and its consequential rejection order, allowing the Writ Appeal and WP(C) No.380/2023. No order as to costs was given.
JUDGMENT :
Kardak Ete, J.
Heard Mr. H.K. Das, learned counsel for the appellant/writ petitioner. Also heard Mr. B.D Goswami, learned Additional Advocate General, Arunachal Pradesh and Mr. R.P. Sarma, learned Senior counsel assisted by Mr. S. Dihingia, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.3.
2. This Writ Appeal is directed against the order dated 17.08.2023 passed by the learned Single Judge in WP(C). 380/2023, whereby, while issuing notice upon respondents the learned Single Judge has refused to grant any interim relief. The appellant/writ petitioner is aggrieved by the impugned transfer order No. PWD-11011/4/2021-Estt-PWD/402, dated 19.07.2023, issued on 24.07.2023, by the Principal Secretary (PWD), Govt. Of Arunachal Pradesh, whereby the appellant/writ petitioner is sought to be transferred from PWD, Longding Division as Executive Engineer, to the Chief Engineer (HW) Zone Office, Itanagar, Arunachal Pradesh, vice Sri Hage Tajang, Executive Engineer, respondent No.3 and also consequential rejection of his representation vide order No. SPWD-1162/2022/201-205 dated 09.08.2023.
3. The fact of the case, in brief, is that the petitioner was initially appointed as Junior Engineer in the PWD, Government of Arunachal Pradesh and was promoted to the post of Assistant Engineer on 11.06.2001. Thereafter, he was further promoted to the post of Executive Engineer on 09.09.2020. The appellant/writ petitioner was transferred as Executive Engineer, Longding Division PWD, Longding from Itanagar vide order dated 06.10.2021.
4. While serving at Longding Division, Longding as Executive Engineer, the Principal Secretary, (PWD), Government of Arunachal Pradesh passed the impugned transfer order No. PWD-11011/4/2021-Estt-PWD/402, dated 19.07.2023, issued on 24.07.2023 whereby the petitioner is sought to be transferred from Longding Division, PWD, Longding to the Office of the Chief Engineer (HW) Zone, Itanagar and in his place the respondent No. 3 has been transferred.
5. The appellant/writ petitioner initially challenged the said impugned order of transfer dated 19.07.2023, issued on 24.07.2023, by filing a writ petition being WP(C) No. 346/2023 which was disposed of vide order dated 27.07.2023, directing the respondent authority to consider the representation of the petitioner on its own merit. However, the learned Single Judge recorded the finding on merit that no interference was called for to the impugned order of transfer dated 19.07.2023 even though, the petitioner may be retiring from his service in about a year’s time. Pursuant to the said order dated 27.07.2023, passed in WP(C) No. 346/2023, the Principal Secretary (PWD) Government of Arunachal Pradesh vide order No.SPWD-162/2022/201-205, dated 09.08.2023, has rejected the prayer of the appellant/writ petitioner on the ground that the appellant was transferred out in the interest of public service and his transfer to Itanagar will facilitate preparation of his pension papers etc.
6. Being aggrieved, the appellant/writ petitioner preferred a writ petition being WP(C) No. 380/2023. The learned Single Judge while issuing notice upon the respondents vide order dated 17.08.2023, has refused to grant any interim relief, against which the present writ appeal has been preferred.
7. The contention of the appellant/writ petitioner is that the impugned transfer order dated 19.07.2023, issued on 24.07.2023 at the fag end of his service career is grossly illegal. The appellant/writ petitioner has completed only one and half years of service as Executive Engineer, PWD Longding Division as the normal tenure is two years. The further contention of the appellant/petitioner is that the impugned order of transfer dated 19.07.2023 has been issued in gross violation of clause 1(d) of the circular dated 02.06.1998, issued by the Government of Arunachal Pradesh, Department of Personnel. The Clause 1(d) in clear terms mandates that officers are not to be posted one year before retirement as it may affect preparat
The main legal point established in the judgment is that transfer orders must comply with relevant statutory rules and should not be passed in lieu of punishment. The judgment also emphasizes the sig....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the power of transfer and posting should be exercised honestly, bona fide, and reasonably, based on administrative exigency and public interes....
Transfers are incidents of service typically shielded from judicial review. However, if an administrative modification is issued without clear objective assessment and merely follows external represe....
Transfer policies are directory, not mandatory, and courts will not interfere unless there is clear malafide or statutory violation.
A transfer order made in public interest must be supported with sufficient reasons, and the absence of reasons makes the order arbitrary and illegal.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
