Case Note & Summary
The State of Maharashtra, through its Home Department, filed a batch of writ petitions challenging a common judgment of the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal dated 19/07/2024. The Tribunal had set aside transfer orders of police personnel (Police Inspectors, Assistant Police Inspectors, and Police Sub-Inspectors) issued on 26/02/2024 pursuant to directives of the Election Commission of India (ECI) dated 21/12/2023. The ECI directed that no officer connected directly with elections should continue in their home district or if they had completed three years in that district during the last four years. In compliance, the Additional Director General of Police issued transfer orders under Section 22-N of the Maharashtra Police Act, 1951 for about 73 police personnel, citing public interest and administrative exigencies. Aggrieved transferees filed Original Applications before the Tribunal, which held that the transfer orders were perishable in nature and effective only during the election process, treating them as deemed deputation. The State challenged this. The High Court considered the validity of the transfers. The Advocate General argued that the Tribunal erred in holding the transfers as perishable, relying on Mahendra Eknath Mali vs. State of Maharashtra, 2018 (5) Mh.L.J. 307, which held that such transfers are not deputation. The respondents argued that Article 324 does not confer power to transfer, and Section 22-N requires an exceptional case, which was not shown. The High Court analyzed the provisions of Section 22-N of the Maharashtra Police Act, 1951, Article 324 of the Constitution, and Section 28A of the Representation of People Act, 1951. It held that the transfer orders were validly issued under Section 22-N in public interest and administrative exigencies, and were not limited to the election period. The concept of deemed deputation was rejected. The court distinguished the Karnataka High Court judgment and applied the ratio in Mahendra Eknath Mali. The court allowed the writ petitions, set aside the Tribunal's judgment, and upheld the transfer orders.
Headnote
A) Service Law - Transfer - Validity of Election-Linked Transfers - Section 22-N of Maharashtra Police Act, 1951 - Article 324 of Constitution of India - Transfer orders issued by State Government under Section 22-N of Maharashtra Police Act, 1951 pursuant to directives of Election Commission of India under Article 324 are valid and not perishable in nature. The court held that such transfers are not limited to the election period and do not constitute deemed deputation. The power under Section 22-N is exercised in public interest and administrative exigencies, and the transfers remain effective beyond the conclusion of elections. (Paras 1-3, 5-7)
B) Service Law - Transfer - Deemed Deputation - Section 22-N of Maharashtra Police Act, 1951 - Section 28A of Representation of People Act, 1951 - The concept of deemed deputation applied by the Tribunal is erroneous. The court held that transfers under Section 22-N do not result in deputation, and Section 28A of the Representation of People Act, 1951 does not limit the duration of such transfers. The ratio in Mahendra Eknath Mali vs. State of Maharashtra, 2018 (5) Mh.L.J. 307 applies, and the Karnataka High Court judgment in Election Commission of India vs. State of Karnataka, 2013 CJ (Kar) 595 is distinguishable. (Paras 3-5)
C) Service Law - Transfer - Police Establishment Board - Section 22-N of Maharashtra Police Act, 1951 - The absence of a transfer policy or specific recommendation by the Police Establishment Board does not invalidate transfers made in public interest and administrative exigencies. The court held that the transfer order dated 26/02/2024 was validly issued under Section 22-N and did not require a separate exceptional case to be recorded. (Paras 3-4)
Issue of Consideration
Whether transfer orders issued by the State Government under Section 22-N of the Maharashtra Police Act, 1951 pursuant to directives of the Election Commission of India under Article 324 of the Constitution of India are perishable in nature and amount to deemed deputation only during the election period, and whether such transfers can be set aside by the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal on that ground.
Final Decision
The High Court allowed the writ petitions, set aside the common judgment of the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal dated 19/07/2024, and upheld the transfer orders dated 26/02/2024 issued under Section 22-N of the Maharashtra Police Act, 1951. The court held that the transfers were valid, not perishable, and did not constitute deemed deputation.
Law Points
- Transfer orders issued under Section 22-N of Maharashtra Police Act
- 1951 pursuant to ECI directives under Article 324 of Constitution are valid and not perishable
- No deemed deputation arises from such transfers
- Section 28A of Representation of People Act
- 1951 does not limit duration of such transfers
- Police Establishment Board recommendations are not mandatory for validity of transfers
- Transfers in public interest and administrative exigencies are not limited to election period
Case Details
2025 LawText (BOM) (2) 83
Writ Petition No. 11740 of 2024 with connected matters
A. S. Chandurkar, Rajesh S. Patil
Dr. Birendra B. Saraf (Advocate General), Ms. Neha S Bhide (Government Pleader), Mrs. Reena A. Salunkhe (Assistant Government Pleader) for Petitioners; Mr. Prashant Katneshwarkar (Senior Advocate) for Respondent No.1 in WP 11740/2024; Mr. Mihir Desai (Senior Advocate) for Applicant-Intervener in IA 15200/2024 and for Respondents in WP 18051/2024; Mr. Prashant M. Nagargoje for Respondents in WP 17630/2024, WP 17628/2024, WP 17629/2024; Mr. Bhupesh G. Singh (Law Officer); Mr. Sidharth Kamble (Law Officer to I.G.P. Kolhapur)
The State of Maharashtra through its Additional Chief Secretary, Home Department & Others
Pramila Vitthal Kawale & Others, Sonyabapu Bansi Deshmukh & Others, Kishor Parashram Khandvi & Others, Vikas Vishwanath Adagale & Others, Hanmant Nigappa Kankadaki & Others
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ petitions challenging the common judgment of the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal dated 19/07/2024 which set aside transfer orders of police personnel issued pursuant to directives of the Election Commission of India.
Remedy Sought
The State of Maharashtra sought to set aside the Tribunal's judgment and uphold the transfer orders dated 26/02/2024.
Filing Reason
The State was aggrieved by the Tribunal's holding that the transfer orders were perishable in nature and amounted to deemed deputation only during the election period.
Previous Decisions
The Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal by common judgment dated 19/07/2024 allowed the Original Applications filed by the transferees, holding that the transfer orders were perishable and effective only during the election process, and that the transfers were in the nature of deemed deputation.
Issues
Whether transfer orders issued under Section 22-N of the Maharashtra Police Act, 1951 pursuant to ECI directives under Article 324 are perishable and amount to deemed deputation?
Whether the Tribunal erred in relying on the Karnataka High Court judgment instead of the Division Bench judgment in Mahendra Eknath Mali?
Whether the transfers were validly made in public interest and administrative exigencies?
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioners (State): Transfer orders were validly issued under Section 22-N in public interest and administrative exigencies; they are not perishable and do not constitute deemed deputation; the ratio in Mahendra Eknath Mali applies; the Tribunal erred in relying on Karnataka High Court judgment.
Respondents (Transferees): Article 324 does not confer power to transfer; Section 22-N requires an exceptional case which was not shown; transfers should be limited to election period; the concept of deemed deputation is correct; no transfer policy framed despite court direction.
Ratio Decidendi
Transfer orders issued under Section 22-N of the Maharashtra Police Act, 1951 pursuant to directives of the Election Commission of India under Article 324 of the Constitution are valid and not perishable in nature. Such transfers do not amount to deemed deputation and remain effective beyond the election period. The power under Section 22-N is exercised in public interest and administrative exigencies, and the absence of a specific transfer policy or Police Establishment Board recommendation does not invalidate the transfers.
Judgment Excerpts
The learned Member of the Tribunal was of the view that the transfer orders that had been issued in view of directives of the ECI would lose their efficacy at the conclusion of the general elections and hence the transfers effected on that basis were in the nature of deemed deputation of the concerned police personnel during that period.
The orders of transfer having been issued in exercise of the powers conferred by Section 22-N of the Act of 1951 did not result in any deemed deputation of the transferees as held by the learned Member.
It had been held in clear terms that there was no question of any deputation in view of such transfer during the period when the election process was ongoing.
Procedural History
On 21/12/2023, ECI issued directives to Chief Secretaries regarding transfers of officers connected with elections. On 22/02/2024, Chief Electoral Officer, Maharashtra issued communication. On 26/02/2024, Additional Director General of Police issued transfer orders under Section 22-N of Maharashtra Police Act, 1951 for about 73 police personnel. Aggrieved transferees filed Original Applications before the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal. On 19/07/2024, the Tribunal passed a common judgment allowing the applications, holding transfers as perishable and deemed deputation. The State filed writ petitions before the Bombay High Court challenging the Tribunal's judgment. The High Court heard arguments on 17/12/2024 and pronounced judgment on 07/02/2025, allowing the writ petitions and setting aside the Tribunal's judgment.
Acts & Sections
- Maharashtra Police Act, 1951: Section 22-N
- Constitution of India: Article 324, Article 328
- Representation of the People Act, 1951: Section 28A
