Government servants have no vested right to a particular posting, and courts should not interfere with transfer orders made in public interest, as established in Shilpi Bose Vs. State of Bihar.

JUDGMENT

[Via Video Conferencing]

Rajiv Sahai Endlaw, J.

C.M. Appln. No.22462/2020 (Exemption from filing legible copies of annexures)

1. Allowed, subject to just exceptions and as per extant rules.

2. The application is disposed of.

W.P. (C) 6331/2020, C.M. Appln. No.22461/2020 (of the petitioner for stay)

3. The petitioner, an Assistant Sub Inspector (Ministerial) in the respondents Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF) and having been transferred to Delhi on 27th May, 2009, has filed this petition impugning the order dated 30th July, 2020 of his transfer from Delhi to Nagpur as well as the order dated 3rd August, 2020 relieving him from Delhi.

4. It is the case of the petitioner, (i) that he was enlisted in the respondents CRPF on 22nd December, 1989 and as aforesaid was transferred to the Provisioning Directorate, CRPF, New Delhi on 27th May, 2009 and has thereafter been transferred to CRPF Hospital, New Delhi on 15th February, 2012; (ii) that though an order of transfer of petitioner from CRPF Hospital, Delhi to Composite Hospital, Jammu was passed on 8th February, 2017, but on representation of the petitioner and on getting a report that the medical facilities as required by the petitioner were not available at the Composite Hospital, Jammu, the said order of transfer was cancelled; (iii) that the petitioner is a case of renal failure and has been under the OPD treatment of All India Institute of Medical Science (AIIMS), between the years 2010 to 2016 and in the year 2016 underwent a kidney transplant at Indraprastha Apollo Hospital; and, (iv) that the petitioner, on 14th August, 2020 represented against the order dated 30th July, 2020 of his transfer to Nagpur and was also given a personal hearing on 1st September, 2020 but the transfer order has not been revoked.

5. The counsel for the petitioner has drawn our attention to page 60 of the electronic file, being the Discharge Summary of the petitioner post kidney transplant at Indraprastha Apollo Hospital and to page 138, being the prescription of Dr.Sandeep Guleria of Indraprastha Apollo Hospital to the effect that the petitioner has been advised "complete isolation". Attention is also invited to page 204 of the electronic file, being the Guidelines for Phased Re-opening (Unlock 3) by the Government of India and Clause 7 whereof deals with protection of vulnerable persons and states that persons with co-morbidities are advised to stay at home, except for essential and health purposes. The counsel for the petitioner contends that considering all the aforesaid, the order of transfer of the petitioner is bad and liable to be quashed.

6. The counsel for the respondents CRPF has appeared on advance notice and under instructions states, (i) that the order of transfer of the petitioner from Delhi has been deferred constantly, at the request of the petitioner and considering the health reasons of the petitioner; (ii) normally a posting is for not more than three years but the petitioner has already been allowed to remain at Delhi for the last over 11 years; (iii) the petitioner has no vested right to remain at one place, as held in Shilpi Bose Vs. State of Bihar, 1991 Supp (2) SCC 659 holding that the courts should not interfere with a transfer order which is made in public interest and for administrative reasons unless the transfer orders are made in violation of any mandatory statutory rule or on the ground of mala fide; (iv) that the transfer of the petitioner to Nagpur has been effected after obtaining a report of the Chief Medical Officer, CRPF to the effect that all the requisite facilities for the ailment from which the petitioner suffers, are available at Nagpur; (v)