Judicial interference in transfers limited to proven mala fides or statutory violation; administrative guidelines non-binding; specific evidence required for malice allegations, not bald assertions.

JUDGMENT :

Sindhu Sharma, J.

1. This intra-court appeal is directed against judgment dated 04.09.2025 passed by the learned Single Judge in WP(C) No. 743/2025, titled ‘Gaganpreet Singh Wazir vs. Food Corporation of India and others’

2. The appellant, a Category-II officer working as Manager (Depot.) in the Food Corporation of India (FCI), has assailed his transfer from Jammu and Kashmir to Uttar Pradesh, vide Order Nos. ZO (N)- 27.0026/1/2023-E-1-ZO NORTH dated 25.03.2025 and DO SRI- 18.0011.0/5/2023-PERS-DO SRINAGAR dated 26.03.2025.

3. The appellant was appointed as Manager through direct recruitment on 15.05.2015 and has since been serving at various postings within the J&K region. Prior to the impugned transfer, the appellant was posted at the Food Storage Depot (FSD) Kupwara from March 2023. Earlier, he served at FSD Chatha, Jammu, and thereafter at the Divisional Office, Srinagar. FSD Kupwara is recognized as a difficult and hard station by the respondents.

4. The contention of the appellant is that in 2022, while serving at FSD Chatha, he lodged a complaint against another officer, Ajay Pal Singh (Manager G), alleging manipulation of stock at the depot premises, which caused losses to the public exchequer. Following the complaint, the appellant was transferred to a difficult and hard station, namely FSD Kupwara, on the directions of the then General Manager, Mr. Harvinder Singh Dhaliwal, allegedly on account of malice. The appellant was thereafter transferred to the Punjab Region; however, Mr. Harvinder Singh Dhaliwal, in connivance with other respondents and acting out of malice, got the said transfer cancelled, while others were allowed to move to their new places of posting.

5. In February 2025, the appellant was asked to provide his preferences for transfer. According to the applicable transfer policy of FCI, a Category-II officer can serve at a regional or zonal office for up to ten years at a stretch, after which such officers are required to be transferred to another region or zone.

6. The appellant submitted three preferences for posting, wherein Punjab was indicated as his first preference, Haryana as his second preference, and Delhi as his third preference, in accordance with the transfer policy. The contention of the appellant is that the respondents, without considering the preferences submitted by the appellant, transferred him to Uttar Pradesh vide Order Nos. ZO(N)-27.0026/1/2023-E-1-ZO NORTH dated 25.03.2025 and DO SRI-18.0011.0/5/2023-PERS-DO SRINAGAR dated 26.03.2025.

7. This order of transfer was challenged by the appellant on the ground that it was issued in violation of the transfer policy and guidelines regulating service conditions, which have affected his rights. It is submitted that the transfer was carried out in a manner intended to victimize him, since Mr. H.S. Dhaliwal, against whom the appellant had previously filed complaints, was already posted in Uttar Pradesh as General Manager. It is further submitted that there was no operational exigency to bypass his preferred regions and transfer him to Uttar Pradesh, particularly when vacancies were available in the regions opted by him. The appellant, it is submitted, has been punished for being a whis