Bombay High Court Dismisses Writ Petition Challenging Transfer Orders of Assistant Directors in Quality Assurance Directorate. Transfer orders issued in public interest and in accordance with transfer policy are not subject to judicial review unless mala fides or violation of statutory rules is established.

High Court: Bombay High Court Bench: BOMBAY
  • 63
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The petitioners, six Assistant Directors (QA) in the Directorate of Quality Assurance under the Director General of Supplies and Disposals, challenged their transfer orders issued by the respondent authorities. The transfers were made in public interest and in accordance with the transfer policy of the department. The petitioners contended that the transfers were arbitrary, malafide, and violated the transfer policy. The court examined the scope of judicial review in transfer matters and held that transfer is an incident of service and courts should not interfere with transfer orders made in public interest unless mala fides or violation of statutory rules is established. The court further held that the transfer policy does not confer a vested right on employees and that no prior consultation is required before issuing a transfer order. The writ petition was dismissed with no order as to costs.

Headnote

A) Service Law - Transfer - Judicial Review - Transfer orders issued in public interest and in accordance with transfer policy are not subject to judicial review unless mala fides or violation of statutory rules is established - The court held that transfer is an incident of service and courts should not interfere with transfer orders made in public interest (Paras 5-10).

B) Service Law - Transfer Policy - Vested Right - Transfer policy does not confer a vested right on employees to remain at a particular place - The court held that transfer policy is merely an administrative guideline and does not create enforceable rights (Paras 5-10).

C) Service Law - Natural Justice - Consultation - No requirement of prior consultation with employee before issuing transfer order - The court held that principles of natural justice do not require giving a hearing before transfer unless the order is punitive or stigmatic (Paras 5-10).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether transfer orders of Assistant Directors (QA) issued by the Directorate of Quality Assurance are valid and not violative of any statutory rules or principles of natural justice.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

Writ petition dismissed. No order as to costs.

Law Points

  • Transfer orders in public interest not subject to judicial review
  • Transfer policy does not confer vested right
  • No requirement of prior consultation with employee
  • Mala fides must be specifically pleaded and proved
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2006:BHC-AS:17845-DB

Writ Petition No. 1695 of 2004

0000-00-00

2006:BHC-AS:17845-DB

A. Satheesan, A.D. Deshpande, Om Prakash Tuteja, Kailash Sainani, K.L. Thawrani, J.P. Saxena

Union of India and others

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Writ petition challenging transfer orders of Assistant Directors (QA) in the Directorate of Quality Assurance.

Remedy Sought

Quashing of transfer orders and direction to allow petitioners to continue at their present place of posting.

Filing Reason

Petitioners alleged that transfer orders were arbitrary, malafide, and violative of transfer policy.

Issues

Whether transfer orders are valid and not violative of statutory rules or principles of natural justice. Whether transfer policy confers a vested right on employees.

Submissions/Arguments

Petitioners argued that transfers were arbitrary and malafide. Respondents argued that transfers were made in public interest and in accordance with policy.

Ratio Decidendi

Transfer orders issued in public interest and in accordance with transfer policy are not subject to judicial review unless mala fides or violation of statutory rules is established. Transfer policy does not confer a vested right on employees.

Judgment Excerpts

Transfer is an incident of service and courts should not interfere with transfer orders made in public interest. Transfer policy does not confer a vested right on employees to remain at a particular place.

Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Dismisses Petition for Hilly Area Reservation in Medical Admission Due to Failure to Claim in Application Form. Petitioner's deliberate omission to claim reservation in online and signed forms cannot be rectified after deadline.
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Dismisses Writ Petition Challenging Transfer Orders of Assistant Directors in Quality Assurance Directorate. Transfer orders issued in public interest and in accordance with transfer policy are not subject to judicial review unless ...