Transfer of government employees is a condition of service, but appointments to cadre posts must comply with statutory rules to avoid illegality.

ORDER

PER: JUSTICE B.K. SHRIVASTAVA, MEMBER (J)

This O.A has been filed on 04.02.2025, against the order Annexure A/3 dated 03.02.2025 by which the applicant has been transferred and the Respondent No. 4 has been posted in place of the applicant. The relief claimed in the para 8 of the O.A are, as under:-

“a) Set aside the order dated 03.02.2025 bearing no. e-DPAR 12 SFP 2025 passed by Respondent No.1 (Annexure-A-3) transferring the Applicant from the post of Deputy Conservator of Forests, M.M. Hills Wildlife Division, Kollegal, Karnataka to Deputy Conservator of Forest, Headquarters, Bengaluru and posting Respondent no.4 to the post of Deputy Conservator of Forests, M.M. Hills Wildlife Division, Kollegal, Karnataka as illegal.

b) Pass such other orders as this Hon'ble Tribunal may deem fit in the facts and circumstances of the case, including the award of the costs of this application, in the interest of justice and equity.”

2. The impugned order Annexure A/3 has been issued on 03.02.2025 stated in:-

“Dr. Santosh Kumar G, IFS (KN:2016), Deputy Conservator of Forests, M.M Hills Wildlife Division, Kollegal, is transferred with immediate effect and posted until further orders as Deputy Conservator of Forests (Head Quarters), Bengaluru, in the existing vacancy.

Sri Paramesha K, SFS, Deputy Conservator of Forests, KSFIC, Mangaluru, is transferred with immediate effect and posted until further orders as Deputy Conservator of Forests, M.M Hills Wildlife Division, Kollegal, vice Dr. Santosh Kumar G, IFS, transferred.”

3. It is not in dispute that the applicant Dr. Santosh Kumar G, IFS (KN: 2016), was posted as “Deputy Conservator of Forests, M.M Hills Wildlife Division, Kollegal” and he is an IFS officer. The Respondent No. 4 Shri Paramesha K, is a State Forest Officer was working as Deputy Conservator of Forests, KSFIC, Mangaluru. By the impugned order Anx. A/3, the Respondent No. 4 has been posted in place of the applicant and the applicant has been transferred from the present post by the impugned order.

4. In Indian Forests Service (Cadre) Rules, 1966 , the definition of the “Cadre officer” has been given in clause 2 (A) “means a member of Indian Forests Service”. “The Indian Forests Service (FIXATION OF CADRE STRENGTH REGULATION, 1966)” Annexure A/7 shows that in Karnataka the post of “Deputy Conservator of Forests (Wildlife)” is a “Cadre post”. It is also not in dispute that the applicant before issuing Annexure A/3 was posted upon a Cadre Post and by the impugned order he transferred upon the Cadre Post.

5. As per the applicant the impugned order at Annexure - A/3 is an illegal order. The cadre post should be given to the IFS officer. The Respondent No. 4 being a State Forests Service officer is not eligible and suitable officer to assume the post of Deputy Conservator of Forests (Wildlife) held by the applicant. It is also submitted that Respondent No.4 is recently posted to the post of Deputy Conservator of Forests on 30.07.2024. By issuing the impugned order and by appointing a non-cadre officer to a cadre post, the Respondent No. 1 has violated its own official memorandum dated 05.12.2024. The impugned order is in violation of Rule 8 and Rule 9 of the Cadre Rules. It is also submitted that the Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka passed the order dated 08/09/2020 in W.P. No. 147272/2020 (Annexure A/8) which is applicable in this case and therefore, the impugned order is liable to be set aside.

6. The Respondents No. 1, 2, & 3 filed their counter reply on 14.02.2025. It is submitted by the aforesaid respondents that the applicant served the present post from 10.08.2022 to 03.02.2025, which shows that he was posted for more than 2 years for the same post. The applicant has been transferred upon the cadre post in the public interest. No vested right is available to the applicant. The transfer is a condition of service. It does not adversely affect the status or emoluments or seniority of the applicant/employee. The competent authority is