HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN (JODHPUR BENCH)
MR. JUSTICE ARUN MONGA, J
Sunil Kumar - Appellant
Versus
The Jodhpur Vidyut Vitran Nigam Limited - Respondent
CW / 1419 / 2025
Decided On : 14-02-2025
(A) Electricity Act, 2003 - Rajasthan State Electricity Board (Technical Workmen) Service Regulations, 1975 - Transfer orders of unskilled/semi-skilled and skilled staff members of power distribution companies challenged for violating service rules and adversely affecting seniority - The court found that transfers outside seniority jurisdiction were improper and set aside the orders. (Paras 1, 3, 14, 15)
(B) Administrative Discretion - The court emphasized that while administrative exigencies must be considered, employee rights and service rules should not be overlooked, especially in cases of hardship. (Paras 16, 14.1)
Facts of the case:
Petitioners, staff members of power distribution companies, challenged mass transfer orders that adversely affected their seniority and service conditions, arguing the transfers violated applicable service rules. (Paras 2, 3)
Findings of Court:
The court ruled that the transfer orders were set aside, emphasizing the need to maintain seniority and consider employee rights in future transfers. (Paras 15, 16)
Issues: The legality of transfer orders and their impact on employee seniority and service conditions were the main issues addressed by the court. (Paras 3.1, 6)
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the service rules prohibit transfers outside the designated seniority jurisdiction, and any transfer must consider the employees' rights and hardships. (Paras 14, 15)
Result: Transfer orders set aside, with directions for fresh orders to maintain seniority.
ORDER :
(ARUN MONGA, J.)
1. Before this Court are, unskilled/semi-skilled and/or skilled (Category 'A' or 'B') staff members of the two Power Distribution Companies (discoms) operating in State of Rajasthan, i.e. Jodhpur Vidhyut Vitran Nigam Ltd. (JVNL) and Ajmer Vidhyut Vitran Nigam Ltd. (AVNL). Vide instant order the entire bunch of above numbered petitions is being disposed of as same controversy is involved therein.
2. Common grievance being, that by virtue of mass transfers carried out by both the Discoms, the petitioners have not only been dislodged, but their service conditions have also been adversely changed qua inter-se seniority, which are to be maintained at Sub divisional/Divisional Level.
3. Given the nature of controversy, the individual facts in the various petitions need not be gone into.
3.1. What is assailed herein is the legality of the transfer orders being in alleged violation of the applicable service rules, as well as, the administrative impropriety of giving complete short shrift to even the deserving cases of extreme hardships which the petitioners would be confronted with.
3.2. Averment also is that the transfer exercise has been carried out in the most mechanical manner, which on the face of it, though may not be punitive, but unwittingly many of the employees would have to relocate themselves to very far off places. Notwithstanding, that they are on the bottom of the pyramid of the human resource deployed by Discoms. Thus, being at the entry level of pay-scales equivalent to those of either Class- IV or Class-III employee of their counterparts, who are serving in the State Government, they can financially ill afford to relocate their families and/or make housing arrangements for them.
4. At the very threshold, pertinent it is to note that the applicable service rules in both the Discoms are pari passu. Therefore, interpretation thereof would be applicable across board to both the discoms.
4.1. In fact, the service conditions vis-a-vis the applicable rules owe their genesis to the erstwhile parent organization, i.e., Rajasthan State Electricity Board. After enactment of the Electricity Act, 2003, a trifurcation of Rajasthan State Electricity Board took place, by virtue of which it was unbundled into three entities, i.e. Power Generation, Power Transmission and Power Distribution (Discoms).
4.2. Prior to trifurcation, ibid, a Memorandum of Settlement, under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, was executed on 26.01.1970 between the then Rajasthan State Electricity Board and Prantiya Vidhyut Mandal Mazdoor Federation (which continues to be existing even as on today to serve the cause of staff of both discoms). Relevant extract i.e. Appendix 'B' of the Memorandum, ibid, reads as under:-
"APPENDIX 'B'
SUB: TRANSFERS OF TECHNICAL STAFF
| 1. | The various categories of Technical Staff may be divided under the categories shown below together with the seniority jurisdiction wherein they are expected to work and which form the basis of their seniority and consequentially liable to be transferred within that jurisdiction. | |
| Category of Staff | Seniority Jurisdiction | |
| 1. Unskilled and semi Skilled technical staff. | Sub Division | |
| 2. Skilled B and skilled A Technical staff | Division | |
| 3. Supervisory Technical staff upto the scale of pay identical to the scale of skilled A category (105-240) | Circle | |
| 4. Remaining supervisory Technical staff | Board as a whole | |
| 2. | Ordinarily no such employee should be transferred outside the seniority jurisdiction pertaining to him. Where, however it is found absolutely essential to transfer such a person outside the seniority jurisdiction, the transfer would be effected under the orders of the respective technical staff about below who would record in detail the reasons for such transfer in the file of the worker concerned:- | |
| 1. From one sub division to another sub division in the same division | Executive Engineer | |
| 2. From one Division to the another in same circle | Superintending Engineer | |
| 3. From one circle to another circle | Chief En | |
Transfer orders violating seniority jurisdiction are improper; employee rights must be balanced with administrative needs.
Transfer orders violating established seniority rules and adversely affecting employee rights are unlawful, necessitating fresh orders that respect seniority and consider administrative exigencies.
Transfer orders within a corporation are valid administrative actions and do not require statutory regulations, affirming the limited scope of judicial review in such matters.
The court upheld the validity of the final seniority list, affirming compliance with the A.P. Reorganization Act and the One Man Committee's directives, while emphasizing the need for adherence to pr....
Employees who voluntarily transfer forfeit their seniority for promotion, which must be calculated from the date of transfer, not from their initial entry date.
Employees transferred at their own request must forfeit previous seniority and accept the lowest rank in the new department, as stipulated by service regulations.
The court emphasized that constitutional challenges must be supported by clear pleadings, and the amendment by TRANSCO was valid as it fell within its regulatory powers.
Judicial review of transfer orders is limited; absence of a defined transfer policy renders such orders arbitrary, necessitating formulation of a policy.
Mutual transfers in Railway services must respect original seniority unless justified; improper reassignment mandates corrective action.
Court affirmed that service prior to inter-divisional transfer counts for eligibility, but not for seniority in promotion considerations.
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.