ORDER

The petitioner, applicant before the Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal at Bengaluru (for short, ‘Tribunal’) in Application No.3340/2023 is before this Court aggrieved by the order dated 17.01.2024 dismissing the challenge to order of his transfer and posting of respondent No.3 in his place.

2. Heard learned counsel Sri Prasad Hegde for petitioner-applicant and learned Government Advocate Sri G.K.Hiregoudar for respondent No.1, who has taken notice.

Perused the petition papers.

3. Learned counsel for petitioner would submit that petitioner and respondent No.3 are Chief Accounts Officers belonging to the State Accounts Department. The petitioner is on deputation to Karnataka Neeravari Nigam as Chief Accounts Officer and respondent No.3 is on deputation to Karnataka State Handicrafts Development Corporation Limited working as General Manager (Finance). It is submitted that the petitioner was posted to work as Chief Accounts Officer, KNNL, Central Office, Dharwad under notification dated 03.02.2022 and before completion of tenure of two years provided to Group-A officials under Government Order dated 07.06.2013, the petitioner was prematurely transferred and posted to work as Chief Accounts Officer, Commissionerate of Watershed Development Department, Bengaluru. It is submitted that the petitioner approached the Tribunal on the ground that the transfer is pre-matured and no reasons are recorded for premature transfer. Learned counsel Sri Prasad Hegde would contend that the Tribunal committed grave error in dismissing the application by observing that the prior approval of Chief Minister is obtained to the transfer of applicant. Learned counsel would submit that though the Chief Minister approval is obtained, no reasons are recorded as there is no reason recorded for premature transfer, the transfer is opposed to Clause 9 of Government Order dated 07.06.2013. Further, learned counsel would submit that the petitioner be continued till the academic year up to 31.03.2024 and thereafter she is ready to go out of Dharwad. To Court query, learned counsel would submit that the children of the petitioner are not studying at Dharwad. Further, learned counsel would also submit that by virtue of interim order, the petitioner continued in the present post at Dharwad and petitioner is still working as such. Furthermore learned counsel would submit that petitioner is entrusted with election work by the Deputy Commissioner, Dharwad by order dated 04.12.2023. Thus, he submits that the petitioner is entrusted with election work, the Government could not have effected his transfer. Thus, he prays for allowing the petition.

4. Per contra, learned Government Advocate would submit that by virtue of interim order, the petitioner is continued and the petitioner would be completing his tenure of two years within another one week, since the petitioner is posted to the present place by notification dated 03.02.2022. Thus, learned Government Advocate would submit that the ground of premature transfer would no more be available to the petitioner. Further, learned Government Advocate would submit that whether reasons are recorded for obtaining prior approval of Chief Minister would also no more survive for consideration since the petitioner would be completing his tenure within another one week. Learned Government Advocate referring to Annexure-D, order of the Deputy Commissioner dated 04.12.2022 would submit that petitioner is made Member of Cash Seizure Redressal Committee at District level and is not deputed to prepare electoral roll and as such, the said committee work could be attended to by the person who is posted in his place. Thus, he prays for dismissal of the writ petition.

5. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of the writ petition papers, we are of the view that the petitioner has not made out any ground to interfere with the order passed by the Tribunal.

6. It is pertinent to note that transfer is not a condition of