Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Amol Radhakrushna Thakare, an employee of the Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation (MSRTC), challenged his transfer order dated 19-04-2018 issued by the Divisional Controller, Amravati. The transfer order stated two reasons: first, that the petitioner had obtained a stay from the Labour Court against the respondent, necessitating the use of transfer power under Circular No.03 of 2018; second, administrative exigency. The court found that the second reason was a camouflage for the first, which was patently illegal and indicative of vindictiveness. The court relied on the Supreme Court's decision in Somesh Tiwari v. Union of India, which held that no transfer can be made with a view to punish the employee. The court quashed the transfer order, noting that the order was full of malafides. However, considering a circular issued by the Vice-Chairman-cum-Managing Director to curb corruption, the court refrained from imposing costs on the respondents. The petition was allowed, and the transfer order was set aside.
Headnote
A) Service Law - Transfer - Vindictive Transfer - Transfer order based on employee obtaining stay from Labour Court is illegal and malafide - The court held that a transfer made vindictively and to punish the employee violates the law laid down in Somesh Tiwari v. Union of India, AIR 2009 SC 1399, and such an order must be quashed (Paras 3-4).
Issue of Consideration
Whether a transfer order that cites the employee obtaining a stay from the Labour Court as a reason is legal and valid.
Final Decision
The writ petition is allowed. The impugned transfer order dated 19-04-2018 is quashed and set aside. No order as to costs.
Law Points
- Transfer order cannot be punitive
- Transfer must be for administrative exigency
- Vindictive transfer violates law
- Malafides in transfer order vitiates it
Case Details
2018 LawText (BOM) (10) 171
Writ Petition No.6463 of 2018
Shri C.V. Jagdale for petitioner, Shri V.G. Wankhede for respondent no.1
Amol Radhakrushna Thakare
Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation through its Divisional Controller, Amravati and Up Mahavyavasthapak Niyantran Samittee No.3, M.S.R.T.C., Central Office, Mumbai
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ petition challenging a transfer order issued by the employer.
Remedy Sought
Quashing of the transfer order dated 19-04-2018.
Filing Reason
The transfer order was allegedly vindictive and based on the petitioner obtaining a stay from the Labour Court.
Issues
Whether the transfer order dated 19-04-2018 is legal and valid.
Whether the transfer order is malafide and punitive.
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioner argued that the transfer order was vindictive and based on his obtaining a stay from the Labour Court.
Respondent argued that the transfer was for administrative exigency.
Ratio Decidendi
A transfer order that is made vindictively and to punish an employee for exercising legal rights is illegal and malafide, and must be quashed. The court will not interfere with transfers made on administrative grounds simpliciter, but will strike down transfers that are punitive or retaliatory.
Judgment Excerpts
It is well settled law that while transfer made on the administrative ground simiplicitor warrants no interference from the Court of law, a transfer made vindictively and in order to teach a lesson to the employee under transfer, violates the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Somesh Tiwari vs. Union of India and others.
The first reason, on the face of it, is illegal and speaks volumes of the vindicative attitude of the respondent no.1.
Such an order, therefore, is patently illegal. It is full of malafides on the part of the respondent no.1 and so it must go.
Procedural History
The petitioner filed a writ petition in the High Court challenging the transfer order dated 19-04-2018. The court heard both sides and delivered judgment on 03-10-2018.
