IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
S.M. SUBRAMANIAM, M. JOTHIRAMAN, JJ.
The Director General, Employees State Insurance Corporation – Petitioner
Versus
K. Monicka – Respondent
W.P. Nos. 15118, 15121, 15126, 15135, 15151, 15178, 15182, 15214, 15589, 15595, 15600, 15604, 15609, 36961 of 2024, W.P. No. 31596 of 2023, W.M.P. Nos. 10625, 16414, 16423, 16432, 16459, 16473, 16503, 16510, 16547, 16988, 16992, 16994, 16997, 16999, 35656, 39913, 39915, 39917 of 2024, W.M.P. Nos. 31224, 31226 of 2023
Decided On : 11-12-2024
ORDER :
Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for the issuance of Writ of Certiorari, call for the records of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Chennai Bench, pertaining to the order passed in OA/310/526/2024 dated 16.05.2024 and quash the same.
1. Under assail is the common order passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Chennai Bench dated 16th May, 2024 in OA/310/00503, 504 and 506 to 513 and 524 to 526/2024.
BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE:
2. The Director General, Employees State Insurance Corporation is the writ petitioner before this Court. The respondents filed Original Applications before the Tribunal, seeking to set aside the order of the administrative transfers and the consequential orders. The Tribunal disposed of the Original Applications by issuing directions. Aggrieved by the said order, the Employees State Insurance Corporation has filed the present writ petitions.
3. The respondents, working as Professors/Assistant Professors in Medical Colleges run by the Employees State Insurance Corporation, were transferred from Chennai to other places on administrative grounds and based on organisational requirements. The respondents initially filed original applications before the Central Administrative Tribunal, challenging the transfer order dated 20.05.2023. The Tribunal elaborately considered the issues and dismissed the original applications with a specific direction to the respondents herein to report to duty at the transferred places, since they are the life-saving Doctors to support the administration by serving in exigencies. The respondents were granted liberty to pursue their pending grievances before the Grievances Redressal Committee and the committee shall consider the grievances looking into the administrative constraints.
4. Challenging the said order passed by the Tribunal in batch of original applications, writ petitions are filed in W.P. Nos. 31570 and 31592 of 2023 and the Division Bench of the Madras High Court passed final orders on 03.11.2023. The High Court without going into the merits of the case, directed the Director General, Employees State Insurance Corporation to give necessary instructions to the Transfer Grievances Redressal Committee to consider the grievances/representations of the respondents and take appropriate decision independently and on its own merits in accordance with law within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the said order dated 03.11.2023. Pertinently, the order of the Central Administrative Tribunal dismissing the original application dated 18th October, 2023 was not set aside. The High Court granted liberty to the respondents to approach the Grievances Committee and the Committee was directed to consider the grievances and dispose of the same.
5. Pursuant to the orders of the High Court dated 03.11.2023, the Grievance Redressal Committee independently considered the grievances of the respondents on individual basis and rejected the same by not recommending the respondents to retain in their original posts at Chennai. Consequently, relieving orders were passed, relieving the respondents based on the transfer orders issued in May, 2023.
6. Once again the respondents filed original applications before the Tribunal in O.A.Nos.503, 504 and 506 to 513 and 524 to 526 of 2024. The Tribunal again re-adjudicated the transfer orders on merits and passed final orders on 16th May, 2024 setting aside the report of the Grievance Redressal Committee dated 02.04.2024 and consequential order of relieving dated 06.04.2024. Direction was issued to the writ petitioners herein to redo the transfer exercise within one month, considering all clauses of the transfer policy, including the priority matrix at Annexure 1. Until then, the respondents were directed not to take any coercive or disciplinary action against the applicants for not joining in transferred places of posting after the reliving order is passed. The period of absen
Employees State Insurance Corporation vs. Union of India
Gujarat Electricity Board v. Atmaram Sungomal Poshani
Shilpi Bose and Others vs. State of Bihar and Others
Administrative transfers are not subject to judicial review unless issued by an incompetent authority or based on mala fides, reaffirming the principle that employees cannot claim a right to remain i....
Judicial review of administrative transfers is minimal; valid transfer policies do not confer enforceable rights. Employees accepting transfer terms in their contracts cannot contest them after prolo....
Transfer of government employees is an inherent condition of service, and courts should not interfere unless there is evidence of mala fides or violation of statutory provisions.
Statutory transfer powers under Rule 226 IREC prevail over policy guidelines; no interference with administrative exigency transfers absent mala fides, despite tenure/policy deviations or personal ha....
Judicial review of transfer orders is limited; absence of a defined transfer policy renders such orders arbitrary, necessitating formulation of a policy.
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.