Judicial review of transfer orders is limited to cases of mala fides or statutory violations; transfers are normal incidents of service.

ORDER :

(Sameer Jain, J.)

The instant petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, whereby a challenge is raised against the impugned transfer order dated 20.02.2024, by way of which, the petitioner has been transferred from the Office of AEN(MST), Kota to the Office of AEN(O&M), Baseri.

2. Being aggrieved of the impugned transfer order, learned counsel for the petitioner has challenged the same, on the following grounds, namely:-

2.1. That the petitioner is a low-paid employee.

2.2. That the petitioner's seniority is to be maintained at the Divisional Level. Therefore, the impugned order, whereby an inter district transfer is effectuated, is in contravention of the Rajasthan State Electricity Board (Technical Workmen) Service Regulations, 1975.

3. In support of the arguments noted above, learned counsel placed reliance upon certain interim orders, passed by this Court, which are marked as Annexure-6.

4. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent-employer has vehemently opposed the instant petition and submitted that the scope of judicial interference is minimal in transfer orders, especially when the same are passed on account of administrative exigencies.

5. Heard learned counsel for both the sides and scanned through the record of the petition.

6. At the outset, it is noted that the Hon'ble Apex Court, through a plethora of judgments, has time and again held that the permissibility and scope of judicial review against transfer orders is miniscule. The rationale exercised to circumscribe the Courts interference with transfer orders whilst exercising writ jurisdiction, primarily pertains to the fact that a bedlam of an aggravated magnitude shall ensue within the workings of the Government, if all employees, posted at a location of their liking, refuse to and/or contest their postings, when issued on account of administrative exigencies. Inevitably, the only scope of interference subsists in an eventuality where the transfer orders are issued on account of certain malafides, at the end of the transferring authority.

7. In Varadha Rao v. State of Karnataka and Ors. reported in (1986) 4 SCC 131, the Hon'ble Apex Court held as under:-

"We agree with the view expressed by the learned Judges that transfer is always understood and construed as an incident of service. The words 'or other conditions of service' in juxtaposition to the preceding words 'denies or varies to his disadvantage his pay, allowances, pension' in Rule 19(1)(a) must be construed ejusdem generis. Any alteration in the conditions of service must result in prejudice to the Government servant and some disadvantage touching his pay, allowances, pension, seniority, promotion, leave etc. It is well understood that transfer of a Government servant who is appointed to a particular cadre of transferable posts from one place to another is an ordinary incident of service and therefore does not result in any alteration of any of the conditions of service to his disadvantage. That a Government servant is liable to be transferred to a similar post in the same cadre is a normal feature and incident of Government service and no Government servant can claim to remain in a particular place or in a particular post unless, of course, his appointment itself is to a specified, non-transferable post."

8. The Hon'ble Apex Court in Rajendra Roy v. Union of India and Anr. reported in (1993) 1 SCC 148, has held that the order of transfer is a natural consequence of service, especially when the transferred employee is rendering his services on a transferable post. The relevant extract is reproduced herein-under:-

"It is true that the order of transfer often causes a lot of difficulties and dislocation in the family set up of the concerned employees but on that score the order of transfer is not liable to be struck down. Unless such order is passed mala fide or in violation of the rules of service and guidelines for transfer without any proper justification, the Court