Back
2022 Supreme(Online)(KER) 20012
HIGH COURT OF KERALA
A. K. Jayasankaran Nambiar, MOHAMMED NIAS C.P., JJ
REJANIMOL T J – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY – Respondent
OP(KAT)/280/2022
SINDHU SANTHALINGAM, A.D.SHAJAN, SRI.B.UNNIKRISHNA KAIMAL, SR.GP
Transfers based on investigations into financial misconduct are permissible in public interest, regardless of individual employee claims.
Headnote:
Transfer - Public Service - KCS (CC &A) Rules, 1960 - Section 15 - The court upheld the transfer of an employee based on procedural non-compliance findings and ongoing inquiries into fund misappropriation, emphasizing public interest and adherence to administrative protocols.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner challenged a transfer order based on allegations of misappropriation of funds without being heard, claiming inconvenience due to relocation over 80 kilometers away.
Issues: Whether the transfer was justified despite the petitioner's claims of being uninvolved in the alleged misappropriation and the inconvenience caused by the relocation.
Ratio Decidendi: The court concluded that administrative transfers related to ongoing inquiries are valid if they serve public interest, irrespective of individual grievances about inconvenience.
Final Decision: The original petition challenging the transfer order is dismissed.
JUDGMENT
Mohammed Nias.C.P.. J.
The above original petition is filed by the petitioner challenging the order dated 18.7.2022 of the Administrative Tribunal that upheld the transfer order dated 24.5.2022 of the third respondent by which the petitioner, a UPST was transferred from Government HSS Murukkumvayal to Government UPS, Chemmanathukara.
2. Before the Tribunal, it was the specific contention of the petitioner that she had no special role with respect to celebration of Platinum Jubilee celebrations of the school in which there were allegations raised including the utilisation of money. It was stated that the complaints originated from an anonymous petition and that the transfer was on the basis of allegation of misappropriation of funds and that the petitioner was not heard before the order was passed.
3. The third respondent had filed a detailed statement stating that a preliminary enquiry was conducted which led to Annexure R3 (b) report, which found that the procedure prescribed in the financial code was not followed and that there were no proper records or statements regarding the accounts or funds collected or its utilisation. It was in such circumstances that the second respondent issued Annexure R3(d) letter to the third respondent forwarding Annexure R3(e) letter of the State Government directing transfer of the petitioner from the said school in contemplation of an enquiry under Rule 15 of the KCS (CC &A) Rules, 1960. 4.The Tribunal considered the reasons given for the transfer and held that the transfer was ordered in contemplation of an action and intended to keep the applicant away from the school and it was in public interest the order was passed and further that the transfer was to a station which is situated within the very same District. Thus, finding that there was no justifiable reason to interfere with the order of transfer, the original application was dismissed
5.Before us, it is the argument of the learned counsel for the petitioner that she had no role in the misappropriation alleged and transfer is to a place more than 80 kilometers away and causes inconvenience to her.
6. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Government Pleader and perusing the records, we find nothing wrong in the order of the Tribunal that rejected the challenge made against the order of transfer.
7. In the circumstance of the case, the order of transfer issued by the respondent cannot be faulted in any manner and no reason for interfering with the order of transfer is made out. We do not think that the Tribunal has committed any illegality while dismissing the original application and accordingly we find no merit in the above original petition and the same will stand dismissed. However, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is willing to join duty on 24.8.2022. If the petitioner joins on 24.8.2022, the respondents will consider treating the period of absence reckoning the available leave eligible to the petitioner and also desist from any disciplinary action on the ground of unauthorised absence, after the order of transfer till joining.
The Original Petition (KAT) is disposed as above.
Sd/-
A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE Sd/-
MOHAMMED NIAS C.P., JUDGE dlk 22.8.2022 APPENDIX OF OP(KAT) 280/2022 PETITIONER'S ANNEXURES Annexure A1 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED NIL IN CONNECTION WITH THE FORMATION OF RECEPTION COMMITTEE FOR THE PLATINUM JUBILEE CELEBRATION OF GOVT. VHSS, MURUKKUMVAYAL.
Annexure A2 TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF THE MINUTES OF THE MEETING CONDUCTED ON
24/10/2019 FOR THE FORMATION OF RECEPTION COMMITTEE Annexure A3 TRUE COPY OF THE MINUTES OF THE MEETING CONDUCTED ON 7/11/2019 IN CONNECTION WITH THE SELECTION OF SOUVENIR COMMITTEE.
Annexure A4 TRUE COPY OF THE ANONYMOUS PETITION FILED BY MURUKKUMVAYAL MADATHIL KARUNAKARAN TO THE GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT (WITHOUT DATE AND SIGNATURE)
Annexure A5 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DTD. 10/12/2021 FROM SHIJU P S FINANCE COMMITTEE CO
