Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Smt. Vijaya d/o Sahebrao Chaudhari, was a Pharmacist in the service of Zilla Parishad, Pune. She was transferred by an order dated 30 April 2016 from Primary Health Centre, Rahu, Taluka Daund to Primary Health Centre, Karla, Taluka Maval, District Pune. The transfer order directed that she be relieved on 31 May 2016 after office hours and join immediately at Karla. The petitioner handed over charge at Rahu on 31 May 2016 and reported at Karla on 1 June 2016. However, the Medical Officer at Karla refused to permit her to join on the ground that she had not produced the relieving order from Rahu. The petitioner addressed a letter on 1 June 2016 asserting her entitlement to work at the transferred posting. Subsequently, by letter dated 3 June 2016, the Medical Officer at Karla reiterated that she would not be permitted to join without the relieving order. Further, the Medical Officer at Rahu issued a letter dated 6 June 2016 treating the petitioner as unauthorizedly absent from 1 June 2016 and calling upon her to show cause why disciplinary proceedings should not be initiated. Another communication from Rahu clarified that the official transfer order had not been received by that office. Aggrieved, the petitioner approached the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal (MAT), which initially granted ad-interim protection on 28 June 2016. However, the MAT later vacated the interim order on 8 July 2016, leading the petitioner to file the present writ petition before the Bombay High Court. The High Court examined the facts and found that the petitioner had complied with the transfer order by being relieved from Rahu and reporting at Karla. The denial of joining by the Medical Officer at Karla was based solely on the non-receipt of the relieving order, which was an administrative lapse between the two offices. The court held that once an employee is relieved and reports at the transferred place, she cannot be denied the right to join and discharge her duties. The show cause notice for unauthorized absence was also quashed as the absence was not voluntary but due to the respondents' refusal to allow her to join. The court allowed the petition, directing the respondents to permit the petitioner to join at Karla and treat her as on duty from 1 June 2016, and quashed the disciplinary proceedings.
Headnote
A) Service Law - Transfer - Joining - Denial of Joining - Transfer order dated 30 April 2016 transferring petitioner from Rahu to Karla - Petitioner relieved on 31 May 2016 and reported at Karla on 1 June 2016 - Medical Officer at Karla denied joining due to non-production of relieving order - Held that once an employee is relieved and reports at transferred place, she cannot be denied joining; administrative lapses between departments cannot prejudice the employee (Paras 2-6). B) Service Law - Disciplinary Proceedings - Unauthorized Absence - Show cause notice for unauthorized absence from 1 June 2016 - Petitioner had reported at Karla but was not permitted to join - Held that absence was not voluntary but due to denial of joining by respondents; disciplinary proceedings cannot be sustained (Paras 4-6).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the petitioner, who was transferred and relieved from her post, can be denied joining at the transferred place due to non-receipt of relieving order by the receiving officer, and whether disciplinary proceedings for unauthorized absence can be initiated against her.
Final Decision
The petition is allowed. The respondents are directed to permit the petitioner to join at Primary Health Centre, Karla and treat her as on duty from 1 June 2016. The show cause notice dated 6 June 2016 and any disciplinary proceedings initiated pursuant thereto are quashed and set aside.
Law Points
- Transfer order valid
- employee must be allowed to join
- disciplinary proceedings for unauthorized absence quashed
- administrative lapses not attributable to employee
