Gujarat High Court Quashes Transfer Order of Police Constable Due to Non-Compliance with Transfer Policy and Lack of Reasons. Transfer Order Set Aside as Arbitrary and Not Based on Administrative Exigency Under Article 226 of Constitution of India.

High Court: Gujarat High Court In Favour of Accused
  • 131
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The petitioner, a police constable, challenged his transfer order dated 18.01.2020 from Jamnagar District to Police Headquarters, Vadodara (Rural), and the subsequent order dated 21.01.2020. He contended that the transfer was punitive, without any administrative exigency, and in violation of the transfer policy. The court examined the transfer policy and found that the petitioner had not completed the minimum tenure and no reasons were recorded for the transfer. The court held that the transfer order was arbitrary and quashed it, directing the respondents to allow the petitioner to continue at his original place of posting.

Headnote

A) Service Law - Transfer - Administrative Exigency - Transfer order must be based on administrative exigency and not punitive - The court held that the impugned transfer order was passed without following the transfer policy and without recording reasons, making it arbitrary and liable to be set aside (Paras 5-10).

B) Service Law - Transfer Policy - Compliance - Transfer order must comply with the transfer policy of the department - The court found that the transfer was made in violation of the policy which required posting for a minimum period and consideration of representations (Paras 7-9).

C) Constitutional Law - Article 226 - Writ Jurisdiction - Interference with Transfer Orders - Writ court can interfere if transfer order is arbitrary, mala fide, or in violation of statutory rules - The court exercised its jurisdiction to quash the transfer order as it was not based on any administrative exigency (Paras 10-12).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the transfer order of the petitioner from Jamnagar District to Police Headquarters, Vadodara (Rural) is arbitrary, violative of the transfer policy, and liable to be quashed

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The court quashed the impugned transfer orders dated 18.01.2020 and 21.01.2020 and directed the respondents to allow the petitioner to continue at his original place of posting.

Law Points

  • Transfer order must be based on administrative exigency
  • not punitive
  • transfer policy must be followed
  • reasons must be recorded
  • writ court can interfere if order is arbitrary or mala fide
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2026 LawText (GUJ) (02) 883

R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 9661 of 2020

2026-02-19

MAULIK J.SHELAT

2026:GUJHC:13677

MR. JATIN V YADAV, MR. P P MAJMUDAR, MS. NIDHI VYAS

Chandravijaysinh Hardevsinh Zala

State of Gujarat & Ors.

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

Nature of Litigation

Writ petition challenging transfer order

Remedy Sought

Quashing of transfer orders dated 18.01.2020 and 21.01.2020 transferring petitioner from Jamnagar District to Police Headquarters, Vadodara (Rural)

Filing Reason

Petitioner alleged transfer was punitive, without administrative exigency, and in violation of transfer policy

Issues

Whether the transfer order is arbitrary and violative of the transfer policy Whether the transfer order is based on administrative exigency

Submissions/Arguments

Petitioner argued transfer was punitive and without reasons, violating transfer policy Respondent-State argued transfer was in public interest and administrative exigency

Ratio Decidendi

Transfer orders must be based on administrative exigency and comply with the transfer policy; failure to record reasons or follow policy renders the order arbitrary and liable to be quashed under Article 226.

Judgment Excerpts

The impugned transfer order was passed without following the transfer policy and without recording any reasons. The court held that the transfer order is arbitrary and not based on any administrative exigency.

Procedural History

The petitioner filed a writ petition under Articles 14, 16, 21, and 226 of the Constitution of India challenging the transfer orders dated 18.01.2020 and 21.01.2020. The court heard the parties and delivered judgment on 19.02.2026.

Acts & Sections

  • Constitution of India: Articles 14, 16, 21, 226
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court High Court of Karnataka Dismisses Writ Petition Challenging DRT Order in SARFAESI Matter — No Interference with Possession Notice as Debtor Failed to Discharge Liability. Court Held That Writ Jurisdiction Under Article 226 Cannot Be Used to Circumv...
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Dismisses State Appeals in Land Acquisition Compensation Cases — Upholds Reference Court's Enhanced Compensation Based on Comparable Sales and Potential Value. The court affirmed that lands with potential for non-agricultural use ...