The power of transfer should be exercised honestly, bona fide, and in public interest, and judicial review of transfer orders is permissible when made on irrelevant considerations or extraneous grounds.

Tarlok Singh Chauhan, J.

This writ petition has been preferred against the order passed by the learned Central Administrative Tribunal (for short ‘Tribunal’) on 29.03.2016 whereby the Original Application filed by the petitioner against his transfer orders came to be dismissed in limine.

2. Briefly stated the facts as are necessary for the determination of the instant petition are that the petitioner in the year 1992 joined the service of the respondent-State as Assistant Conservator of Forests and thereafter during the year 2005 was inducted in the cadre of Indian Forest Service (for short ‘IFS’). Vide order dated 11.06.2014, the petitioner was transferred from the post of DFO, Mandi to the post of DFO (T), Bilaspur, however, thereafter vide impugned notification dated 16.03.2016 was ordered to be transferred from DFO (T), Bilaspur as DFO (Flying Squad),North Bilaspur.

3. The aforesaid notification was assailed by the petitioner by filing an Original Application before learned Tribunal wherein it was contended that this notification was issued in violation of the judgment rendered by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in T.S.R. Subramanian and others versus Union of India and others (2013) 15 SCC 732 fixing therein a minimum tenure of two years to all the incumbents of the All India Service. It was also alleged that in compliance of the aforesaid judgment, the Civil Service Board has though been constituted vide notification dated 10.04.2015, but its recommendations have not been obtained before issuing the impugned notification. It was also averred that the post of DFO (Flying Squad) is not a cadre post and is meant for Junior Officers or the State Forest Service Officers and that the impugned notification had been issued at the instance of the forest mafia because the petitioner was tightening the noose on illegal felling of ‘Khair’ trees. Lastly, it was contended that no reasonable opportunity of being heard has been afforded to the petitioner before issuance of the impugned notification.

4. The Original Application came up for consideration before learned Tribunal on 29.03.2016 and without even calling for the reply and after recording detailed reasons was ordered to be dismissed in limine.

5. Aggrieved by the orders passed by learned Tribunal, the petitioner has approached this Court by raising the same contentions as were raised before learned Tribunal and has prayed for the following substantive reliefs:-

“(i) That the impugned order dated 29.3.2016, Annexure P-12, passed by the Ld. Central Administrative Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench, in OA No. 063/00023/2016 may kindly be set-aside and quashed and the OA, filed by the petitioner, may kindly be allowed, as prayed for.

(ii) Order of transfer dated 16.3.2016 Annexure P-9, may kindly be held wrong, illegal, arbitrary, malafide as well as in violation of transfer policy of the respondent-State and also as a result of colourable exercise of powers and the same may kindly be set aside and quashed.”

6. Respondent No.1 in its reply has justified its stand of transferring the petitioner on account of public interest and administrative exigencies. As regards the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in T.S.R. Subramanian’s case (supra), it is stated that the Ministry of Personnel Public Grievances and Pension has already issued a notification dated 28.01.2014 and constituted a Civil Service Board for recommendations of transfer and postings of IAS/IPS/IFS Officers of the Himachal Pradesh cadre vide notification dated 10.04.2015. It is further averred that insofar as the case of the petitioner is concerned, ex-post-facto approval/recommendations of the said Board had specifically been obtained and minutes of such approval have also been annexed with the reply as Annexure R-1. With respect to the allegation of minimum tenure of service, respondents have justified their stand by relying upon the reasons as accorded by learned Tribunal and in addition thereto it has been averred that the que