High Court of Karnataka Dismisses Writ Petition Challenging Transfer Order of Police Officer. Transfer Order Upheld as Petitioner Had Only One Year Left for Superannuation and No Malice Was Established.

High Court: Karnataka High Court Bench: BENGALURU In Favour of Prosecution
  • 3
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The petitioner, Siddaraju, was serving as Commandant in the Karnataka Armed Reserve Police Mounted Company at Mysuru. He was transferred to Mangalore by an order dated 05.05.2017. Aggrieved, he filed an application before the Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal, which declined to interfere with the transfer order by its order dated 18.05.2017. The petitioner then filed a writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India before the High Court of Karnataka. The petitioner's counsel argued that the petitioner would attain superannuation on 30.06.2018, i.e., in about one year, and that the transfer at this stage would cause hardship. The High Court, after hearing the counsel, held that transfer is an incident of service and courts/tribunals should not interfere with transfer orders unless they are mala fide or violate statutory rules. Since no such grounds were made out, the court found no reason to interfere with the Tribunal's order. The writ petition was accordingly dismissed.

Headnote

A) Service Law - Transfer - Interference by Courts/Tribunals - Transfer is an incident of service and courts/tribunals should not interfere unless the order is mala fide or violates statutory rules - The petitioner, a Commandant in Karnataka Armed Reserve Police, was transferred from Mysuru to Mangalore with about one year left for superannuation - The Tribunal declined to interfere - Held, no ground to interfere with the Tribunal's order as no mala fides or violation of rules was established (Paras 1-3).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal erred in declining to interfere with the transfer order of the petitioner, a police officer, who was due to retire in about one year.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

Writ petition dismissed. No order as to costs.

Law Points

  • Transfer is an incident of service
  • Courts/Tribunals should not interfere with transfer orders unless mala fides or violation of statutory rules is shown
  • Petitioner nearing superannuation cannot challenge transfer on ground of hardship
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2017 LawText (KAR) (06) 15

Writ Petition No.22904/2017 (S-KAT)

2017-06-16

H.G.Ramesh, John Michael Cunha

H.V.Nagaraja Rao (for petitioner), M.S.Prathima (for respondents 1-3)

Siddaraju

State of Karnataka, Director General & Inspector General of Police, Commissioner of Police, Mysuru City, Praveen Alva

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

Nature of Litigation

Writ petition challenging order of Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal declining to interfere with transfer order.

Remedy Sought

Quashing of transfer order dated 05.05.2017 and Tribunal order dated 18.05.2017.

Filing Reason

Petitioner was transferred from Mysuru to Mangalore with about one year left for superannuation.

Previous Decisions

Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal by order dated 18.05.2017 in Application No.2697/2017 declined to interfere with the transfer order.

Issues

Whether the Tribunal erred in declining to interfere with the transfer order.

Submissions/Arguments

Petitioner's counsel submitted that petitioner will attain superannuation on 30.06.2018 and transfer at this stage would cause hardship.

Ratio Decidendi

Transfer is an incident of service. Courts/Tribunals should not interfere with transfer orders unless they are mala fide or violate statutory rules. No such grounds were made out.

Judgment Excerpts

This writ petition is directed against the order dated 18.05.2017 passed by the Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal, Bangalore, in Application No.2697/2017. Learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner will attain superannuation on 30.06.2018, a year hence. Transfer is an incident of service. Courts/Tribunals should not interfere with transfer orders unless they are mala fide or violate statutory rules.

Procedural History

Petitioner challenged transfer order dated 05.05.2017 before Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal. Tribunal declined to interfere by order dated 18.05.2017. Petitioner then filed writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of Constitution of India before High Court of Karnataka.

Acts & Sections

  • Constitution of India: Articles 226, 227
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Allows Appeal in Disciplinary Proceeding for Violation of Natural Justice — No Witness Examined Despite Denial of Charges. Recording of Oral Evidence Mandatory Under Rule 7(vii) of Uttar Pradesh Government Servant (Discipline and Appe...
Related Judgement
High Court High Court of Karnataka Dismisses Writ Petition Challenging Transfer Order of Police Officer. Transfer Order Upheld as Petitioner Had Only One Year Left for Superannuation and No Malice Was Established.