Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MANIPUR AT IMPHAL
M.V. Muralidaran, J.
N. Sadananda Singh - Appellant
Versus
State Of Manipur & Ors. - Respondents
W.P. (C) No. 17 of 2022
Decided On : 06-06-2022
Transfer - Government Employee - Office Memorandum dated 24.7.1982, 24.4.1991, 31.7.1996, 15.11.1996 - The court set aside the impugned transfer and posting order dated 31.12.2021 as it amounted to frequent transfer and was passed in violation of the transfer policy and guidelines issued by the Government of Manipur.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, a government employee, challenged a transfer and posting order, alleging bias and malafide exercise of power. The respondents contended that the transfer was made as per the exigency of service, especially in connection with the State Legislative Assembly Election.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the impugned transfer order was issued under political pressure and was tainted with bias. It also noted that the petitioner had been frequently transferred without justifiable reasons.
Issues: The main issues were the alleged bias and malafide exercise of power in the impugned transfer order, and the frequent transfers of the petitioner without justifiable reasons.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the impugned transfer order was passed in violation of the transfer policy and guidelines issued by the Government of Manipur, and set it aside. It also noted that the petitioner had been frequently transferred without justifiable reasons.
Final Decision: The writ petition was allowed, and the impugned transfer and posting order dated 31.12.2021 was set aside as it amounted to frequent transfer. No costs were awarded.
JUDGMENT
1. This writ petition has been filed to quash the impugned transfer and posting order dated 31.12.2021 issued by the second respondent and to direct the respondents to review/cancel the impugned transfer order and also to consider the dispose of the representation of the petitioner dated 3.1.2022 by a speaking order.
2. Heard Mr. M. Hemachandra, learned senior counsel for the petitioner; Mr. H. Debendra, learned Government Advocate for the respondents 1 and 2 and Mr. Kh.Tarunkumar, learned counsel for the third respondent.
3. The case of the petitioner is that he was initially appointed as Sub-Inspector (Legal) and posted at CID (Crime Branch), Manipur and subsequently, transferred and posted at Imphal West District Police. Thereafter, the petitioner was promoted to the post of Inspector of Police in December, 2009 and posted at 8th IRB attached with Imphal West District Police and thereafter, he was posted at Imphal East and then Bishnupur District Police as OC/CDO Unit, Bishnupur in the year 2014. In the same year 2014, the petitioner was posted at Imphal East District Police. In 2017, as OC/CDO, Thoubal District Police and thereafter, he was posted as in-charge of Special CDO Unit, Khabeisoi.
4. Further case of the petitioner is that to the utter shock, the second respondent issued the impugned transfer order dated 312.2021 transferring the petitioner from in-charge of Special CDO to 8th IRB which is full of bias. Therefore, the impugned transfer order is liable to be cancelled as the same is bad in law and abuse of good office of the respondents in respect of the transfer and posting of an employee working under the respondent Government.
5. The petitioner stated that the Superintendent of Police, Thoubal District vide order dated 3.1.2022 stated that the petitioner attached with Special CDO Unit Camp at 7th MR, Khabesishoi had joined at DHO, Thoubal on 3.1.2022 FN as OC-CDO Unit, Thoubal on transfer.
6. According to the petitioner, the impugned order dated 31.12.2021 was issued under the political pressure of the Minister/MLA under the undue pressure of the third respondent so as to get the political benefit of the political boss. Therefore, the impugned transfer order is tainted with full bias and therefore, the same is liable to be quashed.
7. The second respondent filed counter stating that the transfer and posting is a condition of service and there is no malafide or arbitrariness in the impugned transfer and posting order. Since the petitioner belong to State security force, such transfer and posting order is issued as per the exigency of service in order to maintain law and order situation in the State. It is stated that the recent transfer and posting of Inspector of Police was made in connection with the ensuing 12th Legislative Assembly Election of the State. Since the writ petition is devoid of merits, the same is liable to be dismissed.
8. The third respondent filed counter stating that the allegation of the petitioner that the impugned order 31.12.2021 is an outcome of the malafide exercise of power in an arbitrary manner is without any basis and foundation for the reason that the petitioner failed to identify the person against whom the malafide is alleged. He would submit that the person against whom malafide is alleged must also be impleaded as party so that he gets an opportunity to controvert such allegation. But, for drawing such inference, there must be firm foundational facts pleaded and established.
9. It is stated that if the order dated 31.12.2021 was brought to the knowledge of the concerned authority in time, the order dated 3.1.2022 would not have been issued and the order dated 31.12.2021 reached the office of the Superintendent of Police, Thoubal very lately as the same was brought by way of normal service/day. It is also stated that by the impugned transfer order, the official status of the petitioner was not affected adversely and there is no infraction of any career prospect such as seniorit
The court emphasized that transfer orders should not be interfered with unless they are shown to be vitiated by malafide or made in violation of any statutory provision or issued by an incompetent pe....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the transfer of a government employee should be made in public interest and for administrative reasons, and frequent transfers without justifi....
A government servant holding a transferable post has no vested right to remain posted at one place and is liable to be transferred from one place to another, and the court should not interfere with a....
Courts cannot interfere with transfer orders unless shown to be an outcome of malafide exercise or in violation of statutory provisions prohibiting such transfer.
Transfer orders in public service are valid unless proven mala fide or in violation of statutory provisions.
Point of law : Transfer of officers is required to be effected on the basis of set norms or guidelines. The power of transferring an officer cannot be wielded arbitrarily, mala fide or an exercise ag....
Administrative transfers are within the authority's discretion, and employees have no vested right to remain posted at a specific location. The court emphasized that administrative transfers are esse....
Transfer orders in public service are subject to statutory guidelines, but courts refrain from interfering unless allegations of mala fides are substantiated or statutory violations are clear.
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
