Back
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
Pushpendra Singh Bhati, J.
Kamli Ram Meena – Appellant
Versus
Ajmer Vidyut Vitaran Nigam Limited & Ors. – Respondents
S.B. Civil Writ Petition Nos. 1290/2022 and 11643/2021
Decided On : 21-02-2022
Transfer Policy - Employee Transfer - Rajasthan Power Sector Reforms Act, 1999, Sections 14, 15, 16, 58 - The court discussed the transfer policy and guidelines for employees of AVVNL, the jurisdiction of the Coordination Committee, and the binding nature of the policies framed by the Reconstituted Coordination Committee. The court also considered the applicability of Rule 25A of the Rajasthan Service Rules, 1959, and the conditions for placing an employee under Awaiting Posting Orders. The judgment emphasized the importance of following the transfer policy and statutory provisions in making transfer decisions.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, an employee of AVVNL, challenged multiple transfer orders, claiming unfair and unjust transfers. The petitioner's exemplary work and frequent transfers were highlighted. The respondents justified the transfers based on administrative exigencies and complaints against the petitioner.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the transfers were made within the respondents' powers and for logical administrative exigencies. However, the placement of the petitioner under Awaiting Posting Order was found to be ultra vires the conditions laid down in Rule 25A of the Rules of 1959. The court also noted that the transfer policy was not duly followed for the petitioner, a Senior Class I Officer.
Issues: The issues revolved around the fairness and validity of the transfers, compliance with the transfer policy and statutory provisions, and the justification for placing the petitioner under Awaiting Posting Order.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the importance of following the transfer policy and statutory provisions in making transfer decisions. It held that the placement of the petitioner under Awaiting Posting Order was unreasonable and unsustainable in the eye of the law.
Final Decision: Writ Petition No. 1290/2022 was allowed, quashing the impugned order dated 17.01.2022, while Writ Petition No. 11643/2021 was dismissed. The court emphasized the need to adhere to the transfer policy and statutory provisions in making transfer decisions.
JUDGMENT
Pushpendra Singh Bhati, J. - In the wake of instant surge in COVID-19 cases and spread of its highly infectious Omicron variant, abundant caution is being maintained, while hearing the matters in the Court, for the safety of all concerned.
2. These writ petitions have been preferred claiming the following reliefs:
CWP No. 1290/2022:
"i) by an appropriate writ, order or direction, the impugned order dated 17.01.2022 (Annexure-11) may kindly be declared illegal and be quashed with all consequential directions;
ii) by an appropriate writ, order or direction, the impugned order dated 17.01.2022 (Annexure-12) may kindly be declared illegal and be quashed qua the petitioner with all consequential directions;
iii) further, during the pendency of the present writ petition, if any orders are passed by the respondents effecting the rights of the petitioner involved in the present petition, such order may kindly be taken on record and be quashed."
CWP No. 11643/2021:
"i) by an appropriate writ, order or direction, the impugned suspension order dated 14.08.2021 (Annexure-1) may kindly be declared illegal and be quashed qua the petitioner with all consequential directions;
ii) by an appropriate writ, order or direction, the respondents may kindly be ordered to permit the petitioner to continue to work on the post of Superintending Engineer (O & M), Chittorgarh."
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been unfairly and unjustly transferred from his post of Executive Engineer (Vigilance), Ajmer Vidyut Vitaran Nigam Limited (for short, 'AVVNL'), Chittorgarh 6 times over a period of 5 years, since the year 2017. Learned counsel further submits that the said frequent transfers are even ultra vires the transfer policy as framed by the State respondents for the AVVNL employees.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the petitioner also managed to achieve revenue realization in the Chittorgarh Circle with an efficiency of 100.19% during the Financial Year 2020-21 and had received an appreciation letter therefor, on 25.05.2021 by the Managing Director of AVVNL and was also issued a Commendation Certificate, for the same on 15.08.2021 by the District Administration for his exemplary work during the COVID-19 pandemic.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner however, submits that the petitioner being aggrieved by one of the transfer orders dated 14.08.2021, approached this Hon'ble Court, and that this Hon'ble Court passed an interim order in the favour of the petitioner on 02.09.2021. Learned counsel also submits that circumventing the said interim order of this Court, the State/respondents vide the impugned order dated 17.01.2022 placed the petitioner under 'Awaiting Posting Order'.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that prior to the year 1999, the sole functioning entity assigned with the task of generation, supply and distribution of electricity in the State of Rajasthan, was the Rajasthan State Electricity Board (RSEB), and that the service conditions of the employees were governed by Rajasthan State Electricity Board Employees' Service Regulations, 1964 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Regulations of 1964'). However, as per learned counsel, after the promulgation of the Rajasthan Power Sector Reforms Act, 1999 (for short, 'Act of 1999'), five companies came to be formed for generation and supply of electricity across the State, three being distribution companies namely JVVNL, AVVNL & JdVVNL whereas the other two comprised of a production company RVUNL and a transmission company RVPNL.
6.1. Learned counsel also submits that thereafter, in the exercise of the powers conferred under Sections 14, 15, 16 and 58 of the Act of 1999, the State Government framed a scheme namely the Rajasthan Power Sector Reforms Transfer Scheme, 2000 to cater to the difficulties in the bifurcation process during the transitional period. Learned counsel further submits that under Clause 10(2) of the said Schem
The main legal point established in the judgment is the importance of following the transfer policy and statutory provisions in making transfer decisions, and the binding nature of policies framed by....
Judicial review of transfer orders is limited; absence of a defined transfer policy renders such orders arbitrary, necessitating formulation of a policy.
Transfer policies are directory, not mandatory, and courts will not interfere unless there is clear malafide or statutory violation.
Judicial intervention in transfer matters is warranted when decisions violate established transfer policies and principles of fairness, ensuring no arbitrary actions by authorities.
Pre-tenure transfers without reasons in order, violating policy, are arbitrary and set aside; post-hoc justifications invalid.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the transfer of a government employee should be made in public interest and for administrative reasons, and frequent transfers without justifi....
Transfer orders in public service are valid unless proven mala fide or in violation of statutory provisions.
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
