IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
Ajit Kumar, J.
Anupam Srivastava And Others – Petitioners
Versus
Uttar Pradesh Power Corporation Ltd and Others – Respondents
WRIT -A No. - 10189 of 2024, WRIT -A No. - 9702 of 2024, WRIT -A No. - 10495 of 2024, WRIT -A No. - 10096 of 2024
Decided On : 20-08-2024
(A) Uttar Pradesh Electricity Reforms Transfer Scheme, 2000 - Transfer orders challenged on grounds of arbitrary exercise of power and violation of transfer policy - Court held that transfer is an incident of service and can be enforced by administrative orders; no statutory regulations required for transfers within the corporation. (Paras 10, 41, 52)
(B) Judicial Review - Scope of judicial review in transfer matters is limited; courts should not interfere unless transfers are arbitrary or violate statutory provisions. (Paras 42, 44)
Facts of the case:
Petitioners, employees of Purvanchal Vidyut Vitaran Nigam Ltd., challenged transfer orders dated 28th June, 2024, alleging violation of transfer policy and arbitrary exercise of power.
Findings of Court:
The court found no merit in the petitions as the transfers were within the powers of the corporation and did not violate any statutory provisions.
Issues: The main issues were the legality of the transfer orders and whether they violated the existing transfer policy.
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that transfers are an administrative necessity and do not require statutory backing, affirming that the corporation has the authority to issue transfer orders.
Result: Petitions dismissed.
JUDGMENT :
Ajit Kumar, J.
1. Heard Sri Anoop Trivedi, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Vikas Upadhyay, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Vinay Bhushan Upadhyay, learned counsel for the petitioner in connected petition being Writ - A No.- 9702 of 2024, Sri Shivam Shukla, learned counsel for the petitioner in connected petition being Writ - A No.- 10495 of 2024, Sri Prabhakar Awasthi, learned counsel for the petitioner in connected petition being Writ - A No.- 10096 of 2024, Sri Abhishek Srivastava, learned counsel for the corporation, Sri Adarsh Bhushan, learned counsel for the Managing Director, Purvanchal Vidyut Nitaran Nigam Ltd. Varanasi and Sri Manoj Kumar Sriavastava, learned counsel for the Chief Engineer, Prayagraj.
2. In all these connected petitions different transfer orders have been challenged but more or less the grounds are the same for assailing the transfer orders. Hence all the petitions are being heard to be decided by a common judgment.
3. The petition being Writ – A No.- 10189 of 2024 is taken to be leading petition for reference purposes.
4. Petitioners before this Court in Writ – A No.- 10189 of 2024 are employees working in the Purvanchal Vidyut Vitaran Nigam, Ltd, a Distribution and Supply of the Electricity Company (DISCOM) with the headquarters at Varanasi.
5. The petitioners, who are 8 in numbers are aggrieved by the transfer order dated 28th June, 2024, whereby they have been transferred from their current place of posting to new zone falling in different districts named in the transferred order.
6. It is worth mentioning that petitioner No.- 1 Anupam Srivastava working as Executive Assistant has been transferred from Prayagraj to Varanasi zone, petitioner No.- 2 Sanjay Kumar Pandey working as Executive Assistant has been transferred from Prayagraj to Mirzapur zone, petitioner No.- 3 Ugrasen Singh working as Executive Assistant has been transferred from Kaushambi to Varanasi zone, petitioner No.- 4 Nitin Narayan Srivastava working as Executive Assistant has been transferred from Gorakhpur to Azamgarh zone, petitioner No.- 5 Abhishek Gupta working as Executive Assistant has been transferred from Prayagraj to Varanasi zone, petitioner No.- 6 Hitesh Bhatnagar working as Executive Assistant has been transferred from Prayagraj to Varanasi zone, petitioner No.- 7 Ranjeet Kumar Yadav working as Executive Assistant has been transferred from Prayagraj to Varanasi zone and petitioner No.- 8 Ram Prakash working as Executive Assistant has been transferred from Azamgarh to Gorakhpur zone.
7. In writ petition being Writ – A No.- 9702 of 2024 petitioner Rahul Kumar working as Executive Officer has been transferred from Varanasi to Maharajganj, which is in Gorakhpur zone under the transfer order dated 28th June, 2024.
8. In writ petition being Writ – A No.- 10495 of 2024, petitioner Ganga Prasad Jaisawal working as Executive Officer has been transferred from Prayagraj to new allotted Circle/ EDC Fatehpur.
9. In writ petition being Writ – A No.0 10096 of 2024 the petitioner Arun Kumar Singh working as Executive Engineer has been transferred from District Supply Division Varanasi to the office of Chief Engineer Distribution, Basti Circle, Basti vide transfer order dated 21st June, 2024.
10. The orders of transfer have been challenged basically on three grounds:
(ii). Transfer is one of the conditions of service and with Uttar Pradesh Electricity Reforms Transfer Scheme, 2000 coming into force, the corporation was required to frame statutory rules, failing which the old Uttar Pradesh State Electricity Board Rules will be applicable as the existing service conditions of the Board were to apply muta
Abani Kanta Ray v. State of Orissa and others
B. Varadha Rao v. State of Karnataka and others (1986) 4 SCC 131
N.K. Singh v. Union of India (1994) 6 SCC 98
Shilpi Bose (Mrs) and others v. State of Bihar and others
SK. Nausad Rahaman and others v. Union of India and others (2022) 12 SCC 1
Union of India v. S.L. Abbas (1993) 4 SCC 357
Vishnu Traders Vs. State of Haryana reported in 1995 Supp1 SCC 461
Transfer orders within a corporation are valid administrative actions and do not require statutory regulations, affirming the limited scope of judicial review in such matters.
Judicial review of transfer orders is limited; absence of a defined transfer policy renders such orders arbitrary, necessitating formulation of a policy.
Point of law: Transfer is an incident of service and that a government servant is liable to the transferred to a similar post in the same cadre.
Transfer orders within a company are administrative decisions that can be contested only on grounds of mala fides or clear policy violations, not merely for causing personal inconvenience.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the importance of following the transfer policy and statutory provisions in making transfer decisions, and the binding nature of policies framed by....
Transfer orders violating established seniority rules and adversely affecting employee rights are unlawful, necessitating fresh orders that respect seniority and consider administrative exigencies.
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....
Transfer decisions may prioritize administrative needs over statutory rights; executive guidelines do not impose enforceable rights upon employees regarding transfer policies.
Transfer orders violating seniority jurisdiction are improper; employee rights must be balanced with administrative needs.
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.