IMPORTANT POINT
A government servant holding a transferable post has no vested right to remain posted at one place or other, and transfer orders should be based on administrative exigency and not arbitrarily or for extraneous consideration.

JUDGMENT

1. Calling in question the transfer order dated 20.9.2021 and the consequential orders, viz., the movement order dated 22.10.2021 and the signal order dated 25.10.2021, the petitioner has filed this writ petition. To elaborate, the order dated 20.9.2021 is an order of transfer, transferring the petitioner from 86 Bn to 27 BN. The communication dated 22.10.2021 is an inter-departmental communication directing the authority concerned to do the needful to enable the petitioner proceed on transfer to 27 BN. By order dated 25.10.2021, the respondent authorities rejected the request of the petitioner to consider posting him at GC Imphal or any Imphal based offices on compassionate medical ground.

2. The pivotal contention of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner is that the transfer order and the posting order have been issued in contravention of the restrictions as laid down in Guideline no.22.4 for the medical categorization P-3 vide the Standing Order No.04/2008, dated 15.12.2008.

3. The next plank of the argument of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner was transferred and posted to the 86 Bn only in the year 2016 and inasmuch as he has not completed the zonal tenure of 14 years under the North East Zone and Sector Tenure of 10 years under the M & N Sector as prescribed under Para No.4(ix) of the Standing Order No.07/2015, he ought not to have been transferred. That apart, the respondent authorities are empowered to grant relaxation of one year in view of Para No.4(xvi)(b)(iv) and (viii) of the Standing Order No.07/2015, considering the physical health of the petitioner, but the respondents, being hell-bent, have effected transfer of the petitioner.

4. Per contra, it is the submission of the learned Senior Panel Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents that the petitioner was posted at 86 Bn, Impal with effect from 25.10.2016. According to Para 4(viii) of the Standing Order No.07/2015, the normal tenure in field station is of four years and since the petitioner completed his normal tenure in 86 Bn, his nomination was forwarded and thereupon he was posted to 27 Bn vide proceedings dated 20.9.2021.

5. The contention of the learned Senior Panel Counsel appearing for the respondents is that there was no violation of Guideline No.22.4 of the Standing Order No.04/2008, dated 15.12.2008, as the petitioner has been performing only light duty.

6. The next contention of the learned Senior Panel Counsel is that the petitioner had been examined by the Medical Officer of the 86 Bn and it was opined that the petitioner had no impairment of voice and light duty was advised to be allotted to him. Accordingly, the respondents had only allotted light duty at the transferred place.

7. Heard learned counsel on either side and perused the documents available on record.

8. The only plea of the petitioner is that while effecting his transfer, the respondent authorities had violated Guideline No.22.4 for the medical categorization P-3 vide the Standing Order No.04/2008, dated 15.12.2008 and Para Nos.4(viii), (ix), (xvi) (b) (iv) & (viii) of the Standing Order No.07/2015. To analyze the said argument, the relevant paragraphs are extracted herein under:

22.4. 'P' Factor (Physical Capacity):

This factor shall cover to describe in details about the physical capacity, strength, endurance, mobility, agility and activity of a person, which might be restricted by Medical/surgical conditions and those which are not covered under other factors. Concessions are embedded as a function of age under this factor, since stamina and endurance do decrease with ageing process without any obvious pathology being visible.