SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2023 Supreme(HP) 163

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA
Ranjan Sharma, J.
Savita - Petitioner
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh & Anr. – Respondents
CWP No: 8483 of 2023
Decided On : 04-11-2023

Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner:Mr. Vinod Chauhan and Ms. Aanchal Singh, Advocates.
For the Respondent:Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General with Mr. B.C. Verma, Additional Advocate General.

Judicial intervention in transfer matters is warranted when decisions violate established transfer policies and principles of fairness, ensuring no arbitrary actions by authorities.

Headnote:(A) Transfer Policy - Comprehensive Guiding Principles-2013 - Writ petition filed by a teacher seeking transfer from a hard area to a soft area based on family circumstances - Transfer request rejected on grounds of non-availability of vacancies - Court held that the rejection was arbitrary and not in accordance with the Transfer Policy. (Paras 10-14)

(B) Judicial Review - The court emphasized that transfer orders should be made based on public interest and administrative exigencies, and not merely on recommendations without substantiated grounds. (Paras 6(ii), 12)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner, a Trained Graduate Teacher, sought a transfer from a hard area to a soft area citing adverse family circumstances. Her request was rejected by the authorities, claiming no vacancies were available.

Findings of Court:
The rejection of the transfer request was arbitrary and did not align with the Transfer Policy, which mandates fair consideration of transfer requests.

Issues: The main issue was whether the rejection of the petitioner’s transfer request was justified under the Transfer Policy.

Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that transfer orders must be based on relevant factors and adherence to the Transfer Policy, ensuring fairness and non-arbitrariness in state action.

Result: The court quashed the rejection of the transfer request and directed reconsideration in light of the Transfer Policy.

JUDGMENT :

Ranjan Sharma, J.

Notice. Mr. B.C. Vema, Learned Additional Advocate General appears and waives service of notice on behalf of the respondents.

2. With the consent of the parties, the instant writ petition, is taken up for disposal, at this stage, in view of the order(s) intended to be passed herein.

3. FACTUAL MATRIX:

3(i). The petitioner, a Trained Graduate Teacher (Arts) in the Elementary Education Department, has filed the instant writ petition, seeking the following prayer(s):-

    i) “That Annexure P-3 may kindly be quashed and set aside being illegal and against the directions of this Hon’ble Court as well as the transfer policy.

    ii) That the respondents may kindly be directed to consider the case of the petitioner for her transfer from present place of posting tosoft area of nearer to her house keeping in view of her adverse family circumstances and in view of the provisions of transfer policy in the interest of justice.”

3(ii). Case of the petitioner, as submitted by Mr Vinod Chauhan, the learned counsel, is that the petitioner joined service, on first appointment, as Trained Graduate Teacher (Arts) in 2014, in Government Senior Secondary School Timbi, Education Block Shillai, i.e. a hard / difficult/rural/remote area, as per Office Memorandum dated 10th July 2013, “Comprehensive Guiding Principles-2013 for regulating the transfer of State Government Employees” {referred to as the Transfer Policy}. While working in the school at Timbi, her services were regularized in June 2018 and thereafter she was transferred on 22nd March, 2018 to GSSS Kaffota, District Sirmour, which against a categorized hard/difficult/rural/remote area, in terms of the transfer policy.

3(iii). Mr. Vinod Chauhan, learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that she had filed a Civil Writ Petition No.6338 of 2023, Annexure P-1, seeking a direction to the respondents to consider her case for posting from “Tribal-Hard Areas” [referred to as Most Difficult / Tribal / Difficult /Hard/Rural (Remote) Areas to a “Soft Areas” [referred to as Non Tribal-Non Difficult/Hard/Rural/Remote Areas], in terms of the existing Transfer Policy.

4. It is further submitted that in compliance to the directions passed by this Court in the aforesaid writ petition, she submitted a representation, Annexure P-2, indicating the stations of choice in the soft area, but her representation was turned down/rejected by the Respondent No.2-Directorof Elementary Education, Himachal Pradesh on 10.10.2023, Annexure P-3, forthe reason, that no vacancy is available, at the given stations of choice in the soft area and all the indicated stations are already filled up. In this background, the learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that her case has been rejected illegally and arbitrarily, on extraneous considerations and by acting dehors the transfer policy and therefore, her deserves to be considered in terms of the Transfer Policy.

5. STAND OF STATE AUTHORITIES:

Per contra, Mr. Anup Rattan, learned Advocate General assisted by Mr. B.C. Verma, learned Additional Advocate General submits that, unless and until the vacant stations are available, the petitioner cannot claim posting to soft areas/stations, as of right. However, the Learned Advocate General fairly submits that instead of filing reply, in this case, in case the petitioner makes a fresh representation her case shall be examined/considered, in terms of the existing transfer policy.

6. LEGAL POSITION IN TRANSFER MATTERS:

6(i). Borne out from the mandate of Law, as evolved from time to time, the legal principles in normal parlance and the exceptions, permitting judicial intervention are to be kept in view.

6(ii). In normal parlance, an employee of the state government, who hold a State Cadre post, as in this case, is liable to be transferred from one place to another throughout the State. Such government servant, who holds a transferable post, has neither any fundamental right nor any vested right to remain posted at one place or to

    Click Here to Read the rest of this document
    1
    2
    3
    4
    5
    6
    7
    8
    9
    10
    11
    SupremeToday Portrait Ad
    supreme today icon
    logo-black

    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

    qr

    Scan Me!

    India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

    For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

    whatsapp-icon Back to top