Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, C.KUMARAPPAN
Union of India, Rep. By its Secretary, Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology – Appellant
Versus
V. Sridharan – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. transfer order challenged in court. (Para 1) |
| 2. arguments against the transfer's administration. (Para 2 , 3 , 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 3. court’s rationale on administrative transfers. (Para 4 , 8 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14) |
| 4. legal clarification regarding malice in transfers. (Para 15 , 16 , 17 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22) |
| 5. writ petition allowed; cat's order set aside. (Para 23) |
ORDER :
S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.
Under assail is the order dated 20.01.2025 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Chennai Bench (hereinafter called as ‘CAT’) in O.A.No.1537 of 2024. The order of transfer, transferring the 1st respondent from Chennai to Patna vide proceedings dated 21.10.2024 was under challenging in the Original Application before the CAT. Since CAT allowed the Original Application by set aside the order of transfer, the Union of India preferred the present writ petition.
2. The learned Additional Solicitor General of India Mr.A.RL.Sundaresan, appearing on behalf of the writ petitioners would mainly contend that it is an order of transfer passed in the interest of administration. Order of transfer was passed on account of the reason that the competent authority found that there was a requiremen
Administrative transfers cannot be challenged on grounds of malice in law; only malice in fact is relevant when considering the legality of such orders.
Judicial review of administrative transfers under Article 226 is limited; transfers lack statutory force and can only be challenged on specific grounds such as mala fide or incompetence.
Courts cannot interfere with transfer orders unless shown to be an outcome of malafide exercise or in violation of statutory provisions prohibiting such transfer.
The transfer order based on allegations should be followed by a detailed investigation and disciplinary action, and the individual should be provided an opportunity to defend against the allegations ....
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.
Legal malice is insufficient to challenge a transfer order unless clear procedural violations or malafide intentions can be proven.
Burden of proving mala fides in transfer orders is high; transfers made in public interest are generally not subject to judicial intervention unless proven arbitrary.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
