Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Mr. Thomas George D'Souza, was employed as a driver with the Directorate of Health Services, Government of Goa, and had completed about 16 years of service. He had been transferred multiple times across various health centres in Goa. In 2016, he was posted at the Primary Health Centre, Aldona. In 2019, the respondent No.2 issued a transfer order transferring him to Cansaulim, South Goa. The petitioner challenged this transfer order by way of a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, contending that the transfer was in violation of the transfer guidelines issued by the Government of Goa, which prescribe a minimum tenure of two years at a particular station. He had not completed two years at Aldona at the time of the impugned transfer. The respondents argued that the transfer was made in public interest and that the guidelines were not statutory. The court examined the transfer guidelines and found that they clearly mandated a minimum tenure of two years. The court held that the transfer order was in clear violation of these guidelines and therefore liable to be quashed. The court allowed the petition, quashed the transfer order, and directed the respondents to consider the petitioner's representation in accordance with the guidelines. The court also made the rule absolute.
Headnote
A) Service Law - Transfer - Violation of Transfer Guidelines - Government of Goa Transfer Guidelines - The petitioner, a driver with the Directorate of Health Services, challenged his transfer order from Primary Health Centre, Aldona to Cansaulim, South Goa, on the ground that he had not completed the minimum tenure of two years at Aldona. The court held that the transfer order was in clear violation of the Government of Goa's transfer guidelines which prescribe a minimum tenure of two years at a particular station. The court quashed the transfer order and directed the respondents to consider the petitioner's representation in accordance with the guidelines. (Paras 2-6) B) Constitutional Law - Writ Jurisdiction - Article 226 of the Constitution of India - Judicial Review of Transfer Orders - The court exercised its writ jurisdiction under Article 226 to examine the legality of the transfer order. It reiterated that while courts normally do not interfere with transfer orders, they can do so if the order is passed in violation of statutory rules or guidelines. In this case, the transfer order was found to be contrary to the transfer policy, warranting interference. (Paras 2, 6)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the transfer order of the petitioner is in violation of the statutory guidelines issued by the Government of Goa regarding minimum tenure of posting.
Final Decision
The court allowed the writ petition, quashed the transfer order dated 20.09.2019, and directed the respondents to consider the petitioner's representation in accordance with the transfer guidelines.
Law Points
- Transfer policy
- Minimum tenure
- Violation of guidelines
- Article 226
- Judicial review of transfer orders
