HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN (JODHPUR BENCH)
MR. JUSTICE ARUN MONGA, J
Bhagwat Giri Goswami - Appellant
Versus
THE State of Rajasthan - Respondent
CW / 584 / 2023
Decided On : 06-03-2025
(A) Transfer of Service - Administrative Law - The petitioner challenged a transfer order dated 04.11.2022, asserting that he could not be transferred to a lower post of Medical Officer from Senior Medical Officer - II. The Court issued an interim stay on the transfer order pending consideration. (Paras 1, 2, 4)
(B) Judicial Review - The Court generally refrains from intervening in transfer matters, recognizing the administrative needs of government employment. However, it maintained the interim order while allowing future administrative actions. (Paras 5, 7)
(C) Interim Orders - The Court clarified that granting liberty to issue fresh orders does not imply a directive to do so without necessity. (Paras 8)
Facts of the case:
The petitioner was transferred from Rajsamand to Barmer, which he contested on the grounds of being moved to a post with lesser responsibilities.
Findings of Court:
The interim stay on the transfer order was made absolute, allowing the respondents to issue new orders if required.
Issues: The main issues addressed were the legality of the transfer and the Court's jurisdiction over transfer matters.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the administrative nature of transfer decisions and the limited scope of judicial intervention in such matters.
Result: The transfer order was stayed, and the matter was disposed of.
ORDER :
ARUN MONGA, J.
1. The petitioner before this Court is assailing an order dated 04.11.2022 (Annex.-5), vide which he was transferred from Rajsamand to Barmer.
2. During the pendency of writ proceedings, a co-ordinate bench of this Court, then seized of the matter, passed an interim order dated 12.01.2023 staying the implementation of the transfer order qua the petitioner. Same being apposite is reproduced hereinbelow:-
“ It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that by order dated 04.11.2022 (Annex.5), the petitioner has been transferred vice respondent No.4.
Submissions have been made that the respondent No.4 is Medical Officer, whereas, petitioner is Senior Medical Officer – II and, therefore, the petitioner could not have been transferred on the post of Medical Officer.
Submissions have also been made that Hospital, where the petitioner has been transferred, there is n post of SMO-II.
Matter requires consideration.
Issue notice. Issue notice of stay application also.
Mr. Mehardeen Mehar, learned counsel is directed to accept notice on behalf of respondent Nos.1 to 3, therefore, issue notice to respondent No.4 only.
A copy of the writ petition be served on Mr. Mehardeen Mehar, who may complete his instructions in the matter/file reply. In the meanwhile and until further orders, effect and operation of the order dated 04.11.2022 (Annex.5) qua the petitioner shall remain stayed.
The respondents would be free to seek vacation of the interim order after filing of the reply.
Office is directed to reflect the name of Mr. Mehardeen Mehar as counsel appearing for the respondents in the cause list.
List alongwith S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.13026/2022.”
3. Aforesaid stay order continues to subsist in favour of the petitioner till date.
4. Transfers are a standard and integral aspect of government employment conditions. Employees do not possess an inherent right to demand continuation of their service at a specific location. 5. This Court ordinarily refrains from intervening in transfer matters, acknowledging administrative needs for employees to fulfill their duties at assigned locations.
6. In the instant case, given the duration of the interim protection granted by this Court, its utility appears to have waned over time.
7. Be that as it may, the interim order is made absolute, but with liberty to the respondents to pass fresh orders in future, if necessary due to administrative exigency.
8. In the parting, it is made clear that granting liberty to pass fresh orders is not to be construed as a direction of this Court to necessarily pass fresh orders in case there is no such requirement otherwise.
9. Disposed of as above.
10. Pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed of.
Judicial review of transfer orders is limited; courts recognize administrative discretion while maintaining interim protections as necessary.
Transfer orders must comply with established rules and procedures, and administrative needs cannot override legal requirements.
The court upheld that while transfers are necessary for administrative efficiency, they must comply with established policies regarding tenure at postings.
The court emphasized that transfer orders must comply with jurisdictional authority and procedural rules, reaffirming that employees do not have an inherent right to remain at a specific location.
Court upheld the principle that employees in government service do not have an inherent right to remain in a specific location, allowing for administrative transfers.
The court upheld the administrative authority's right to transfer employees while emphasizing the limited scope of judicial intervention in such matters.
Judicial intervention in transfer matters is limited, acknowledging administrative discretion while protecting employee rights against unjust transfers.
Government employees do not possess an inherent right to remain at a specific location, with transfers being integral to employment conditions.
The court upheld the principle that government employees do not have an absolute right to remain at a specific posting, allowing for necessary administrative transfers.
The necessity for administrative actions, such as transfers, must be continually justified, and changes in circumstances can invalidate previously valid orders.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.