In this post we will discuss about a challenging transfer of an IAS Ofiicer wherein the court held that The power to transfer was vested in the employer, who was to exercise it as per administrative exigencies keeping in view public interest, unless it involved adverse impact on career or further prospects and employees can’t dictate on terms of place of posting says Punjab and Haryana high court.

EMPLOYEES CAN’T DICTATE TERMS OF PLACE OF POSTING SAYS HIGH COURT.

Also Read- No govt servant has right to stay posted at place of choice

IAS Officer Transfer Challenged in Punjab &Haryana High Court
IAS Officer Transfer Challenged in Punjab &Haryana High Court

The power to transfer was vested in the employer, who was to exercise it as per administrative exigencies keeping in view public interest, unless it involved adverse impact on career or further prospectsand employees can’t dictate on terms of place of posting says Punjab and Haryana high court.

Also Read- Can a government employee claim right to stay posted 

FACTS

The petitioner Ravi Prakash Gupta, a visually impaired IAS officer, challenged his transfer by alleging that he has been deliberately denied field work by the Haryana Government. His contention was that he would not be expanded for central deputation unless he has not served field posting in his service tenure. Reply filed by Respondent shows that the petitioner has completed the requisite three years filed experience on the post specified, which make him eligible for consideration for central deputation at the level of the deputy secretary. Punjab and Haryana high court found the same.

Also Read- HC questions transfer of IAS officer despite stay order

HIGH COUR HELD

A division bench comprising Justice Augustin George Mason and Justice Ashok Kumar Varma Has passed Order dismissing petition filed  by Gupta that,

  • The power to transfer was vested in the employer, who was to exercise it as per administrative exigencies keeping in view public interest, unless it involved adverse impact on career or further prospects.
  • The exercise of power to transfer in the present case could not be said to be against the law, calling for interference by this court in exercise of its powers under Article 226 of the Constitution
  • The imputed transfer order passed by Haryana Government was not malafide, discriminatory or in violation of the statutory rules governing the service.

ALSO READ- CAN TRANSFER OF GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES BE CHALLENGED IN COURT ?

LEGAL OPINION

Transfer is an incident of service. The power to transfer was vested in the employer, who was to exercise it as per administrative exigencies keeping in view public interest. There is no discrimination and violation of Indian Administrative service ( cadre) Rules.

CONCLUSION

Gupta has been alleging that he has been deliberately denied field work by the state. His grievance was that all his juniors were assigned field work as DC of districts, which was not considered for him.Punjab and Haryana high court passed these orders while dismissing the petition filed by Gupta upholding the order dated June 3, 2020, passed by the Chandigarh bench of had dismissed his plea challenging the transfer order dated May 18, 2020, from the post of deputy commissioner (DC), Fatehabad, to the post of director, Swarna Jayanti Haryana Institute for Fiscal Management.

ALSO READ- TRANSFER CHALLENGED IN PUNJAB HARYANA HIGH COURT CHANDIGARH

This post is written by Revathi Balakrishnan.

For case specific advice consults with service Law subject matter expert and gets professional Legal advice from Top High Court Service lawyer in Chandigarh Panchkula Mohali. Kharar Derabassi Zirakpur

More on 99888-17966.