A transfer order cannot be used as a substitute for disciplinary action; if proven to be punitive, it is liable to be quashed.

JUDGMENT :

Hon'ble J.J. Munir, J.-This writ petition is directed against the transfer order dated 9.10.2024 passed by the Chief Engineer, Distribution Division-II, Prayagraj, transferring the petitioner, an Assistant Engineer, from the Electricity Distribution Sub-Division Katehara, Electricity Distribution Division, Handia, Prayagraj to the Electricity Distribution Sub-Division-City, Pratapgarh, falling under the Electricity Distribution Division-I, Pratapgarh.

2. The facts of this case would show that the petitioner has been in the employ of the Uttar Pradesh Power Corporation Limited, Lucknow (for short, 'the Corporation') since the year 2008. He was posted at Prayagraj (then called Allahabad) from the year 2008 to April, 2013 in different establishments. In April, 2013, he was transferred to Ghazipur, but in November, 2015, he was back at Prayagraj, where again he served in different positions in varying establishments, up to the month July, 2019. In July, 2019, he was transferred to the Gorakhpur Zone and then posted at Bhatpaarrani, Deoria. He remained posted in the Gorakhpur Zone up to 28.6.2024, when on his request that his wife was serving as a Lecturer with a Government Institution, to wit, the Gauri Pathshala Inter College, Malviya Nagar, Prayagraj. he was transferred to Prayagraj once again.

3. A perusal of the transfer order dated 28.6.2024 passed by the Managing Director, Purvanchal Vidyut Vitaran Nigam Limited, Varanasi, would show that the petitioner was transferred from the Electricity Test Division-I, Gorakhpur to Prayagraj under the control of the Chief Engineer (Distribution), Prayagraj Region-II. In Column No. 5 of the said order, there is a remark, which reads: ''swayam ke anurodh par pati-patni sarkari sewa me karyarat''.

4. The Chief Engineer (Distribution)-II vide order dated 30.6.2024 posted the petitioner to the Electricity Distribution Sub-Division, Katehara, Prayagraj, falling under the Electricity Distribution Division, Handia, Prayagraj. This posting was given to the petitioner on administrative grounds, bearing in mind the interest of the Corporation. This is what is said in the remarks column carried in the order dated 30.6.2024. Now, by the impugned order dated 9.10.2024, the Chief Engineer (Distribution)-II, Prayagraj has transferred the petitioner from the Electricity Distribution Sub-Division, Katahara, Prayagraj, falling under Electricity Distribution Division, Handia, Prayagraj to the Electricity Distribution Sub-Division-City, Pratapgarh, falling under the Electricity Distribution Division-I, Pratapgarh.

5. This Court issued a notice of motion vide order dated 8.11.2024 in the following terms:

''The petitioner says that he was transferred from Gorakhpur to Prayagraj on his own request vide order dated 28.6.2024 because his wife is in Government service posted at Prayagraj. Now, by the impugned order dated 19.10.2024, he has been transferred from Prayagraj to Pratapgarh.

Prima facie once an employee is transferred on his request to a particular station on ground that his wife is posted there, a swift transfer to another station within four months may give rise to an inference of mala fide exercise of power.

Issue notice.

Let the Chief Engineer, Distribution-II, Prayagraj file a counter-affidavit, which shall be his own affidavit, showing cause why on an inference of mala fide exercise of power, the impugned order be not quashed.

Looking to the short point involved, lay this matter as fresh on 21.11.2024, by which time, the required counter-affidavit shall be positively filed by the Chief Engineer.

Let this order be communicated to the Chief Engineer, Distribution-II, Prayagraj through the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Allahabad by the Registrar (Compliance) within 24 hours.''

6. A counter-affidavit has been filed on behalf of respondent No. 9.

7. Heard Mr. Shivdutt Yadav, Advocate holding brief of Mr. Mahendra Kumar Yadav, learned Counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Manoj Kumar Srivastava, learned Counsel a