Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Rajan Ramchandra Bhogale, an Assistant Commissioner of Police (ACP) in Pune, filed a writ petition challenging his transfer from the post of ACP Traffic to ACP Wanavadi, Pune, effected by an order dated 31st May 2013. The transfer was part of a larger transfer order dated 23rd May 2013 involving 38 officers in the cadre of ACP/Sub-Divisional Police Officer/Deputy Superintendent of Police across Maharashtra. The petitioner alleged that the transfer was arbitrary, malafide, and in violation of the Maharashtra Police (Transfer of Officers) Rules, 2012. He claimed that the transfer was engineered by the third respondent, Annasaheb Babu Bandgar, also an ACP, to accommodate him in Pune. The court examined the facts and found that the petitioner had been transferred within the same city (Pune) from one division to another, which did not cause any hardship. The court noted that the petitioner had assumed charge at the new post on 1st July 2013 and had not challenged the transfer promptly. The court held that transfer is an incidence of service and courts should not interfere unless the order is malafide or in violation of statutory rules. The petitioner failed to provide any evidence of malafides or violation of rules. The court also observed that the petitioner had not impleaded the officer who allegedly benefited from the transfer as a party. Consequently, the court dismissed the petition, finding no merit.
Headnote
A) Service Law - Transfer - Administrative Routine - Transfer is an incidence of service and courts should not interfere unless malafide or in violation of statutory rules - The petitioner, an Assistant Commissioner of Police, challenged his transfer from ACP Traffic to ACP Wanavadi, alleging malafides and arbitrariness - The court held that the transfer was part of a routine administrative exercise and the petitioner failed to establish any malafides or violation of rules - Held that the petition was devoid of merit and dismissed (Paras 1-10).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the transfer order dated 23rd May 2013 and subsequent internal transfer of the petitioner from ACP Traffic to ACP Wanavadi is arbitrary, malafide, or in violation of any statutory rules, warranting interference by the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
Final Decision
The writ petition is dismissed. Rule discharged. No order as to costs.
Law Points
- Transfer is an incidence of service
- Courts should not interfere with transfer orders unless malafide or in violation of statutory rules
- Petitioner failed to establish malafides or violation of rules
