Transfer of government employees is permissible based on administrative exigencies, provided there is no infringement of legal rights or prejudicial effect on the employee's service conditions.

JUDGMENT :

KARDAK ETE, J.

Heard Mr. K. Tama, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Ms. G. Ete, learned Additional Senior Government Advocate for the State respondent Nos. 1 & 2 and Ms. N. Danggen, learned counsel for the respondent No.3.

2. The challenge made in this writ petition is to the order of transfer dated 16.07.2025, passed by the Principal Chief Conservator of Forests (PCCF) & Head of Forest Force (HoFF), [Environment, Forest & Climate Change (E, F & CC)], Government of Arunachal Pradesh, whereby as many as 15 (fifteen) State Forest Officers, including the petitioner and Respondent No. 3, have been transferred and posted to different places of posting and also to the subsequent order dated 05.09.2025, passed by the Principal Chief Conservator of Forests (PCCF) & Head of Forest Force (HoFF), [Environment, Forest & Climate Change (E, F & CC)], Government of Arunachal Pradesh, by which the representation of the petitioner seeking retention at Pasighat has been rejected and the petitioner has been directed to report to his new place of posting as Divisional Forest Officer (DFO), Silviculture Division, Itanagar.

3. The case, in brief, is that the petitioner is an Arunachal Pradesh Forest Service Officer (APFS) serving in the cadre of Additional Deputy Conservator of Forests (ADCF) and is presently posted as Divisional Forest Officer (DFO), Pasighat Forest Division, Pasighat, pursuant to the transfer order dated 13.07.2023. While the petitioner was serving as DFO, Pasighat Forest Division, vide order dated 16.07.2025 passed by the PCCF & HoFF (E, F & CC), as many as 15 officers of the Forest Department, including the petitioner and Respondent No. 3, have been transferred to different places of posting. The petitioner has been transferred and posted as DFO, Silviculture, Itanagar and Respondent No. 3, who is serving as Assistant Conservator of Forests (ACF) on probation, has been posted as DFO, Pasighat Forest Division, in place of the petitioner.

4. According to the petitioner, the service conditions of the Arunachal Pradesh Forest Service are governed by the Arunachal Pradesh Forest Service Rules, 2019 (in short, the APFS Rules , 2019). As per Rule 3(2) thereof, there are four grades of cadre, namely, Entry Grade, Senior Grade, Selection Grade and Administrative Grade. The post of Assistant Conservator of Forests (ACF) falls under the Entry Grade, whereas the post of Additional Deputy Conservator of Forests (ADCF) is a Senior Grade post. A person appointed or promoted to the Entry Grade of the service is required to undergo probation for a period of two years. Schedule-I to the APFS Rules , 2019 prescribes the cadre strength of each of the four grades of service. As per Schedule-I C, there are 19 posts of ADCFs (Senior Grade), which include one post in the Pasighat Forest Division. Schedule-I D provides for 22 posts of ACFs (Entry Grade), designated as attached officers in various Forest Divisions.

5. It is the contention of the petitioner that the Respondent No. 3 being an ACF, an officer in the Entry Grade and that too on probation, is not eligible to hold the post of DFO, Pasighat Forest Division, as the post of DFO, Pasighat Forest Division is to be manned by the cadre of ADCF (Senior Grade). The Respondent No. 3 has been promoted to the post of ACF (Entry Grade) only on 25.03.2025 and is still on probation for 2 years. Therefore, he is not even a member of the regular service in the cadre of ACF. Even if his service is confirmed as ACF, the Respondent No. 3 cannot be allowed t