Case Note & Summary
The appellant, Ramesh, was working as an Assistant Administrative Officer in the Life Insurance Corporation of India (LIC) at Raichur. He was transferred to Hyderabad by an order dated 23.09.2015. Aggrieved by the transfer, he filed a writ petition before the learned Single Judge of the High Court of Karnataka, which was dismissed on 05.07.2016. He then filed an intra-court appeal. The appellant contended that the transfer violated the LIC transfer policy, which stipulated a minimum tenure of 3 years, and that the transfer was mala fide and motivated by personal vendetta. The respondents argued that transfer is an incident of service and the transfer policy is not statutory. The court held that transfer is an incident of service and courts should not interfere unless mala fides or violation of statutory rules is established. The transfer policy does not have statutory force and does not confer any enforceable right. The allegations of mala fides were not supported by concrete evidence. The court dismissed the appeal, upholding the transfer order.
Headnote
A) Service Law - Transfer - Transfer is an incident of service - Courts should not interfere with transfer orders unless mala fides or violation of statutory rules is established - The appellant, an employee of LIC, was transferred from Raichur to Hyderabad. He challenged the transfer on the ground that it violated the transfer policy and was mala fide. The court held that transfer is an incident of service and the transfer policy does not have statutory force. The court found no mala fides or violation of rules. (Paras 1-10) B) Service Law - Transfer Policy - Transfer policy is not statutory and does not confer any enforceable right - The appellant contended that the transfer policy required a minimum tenure of 3 years. The court held that the transfer policy is merely an administrative guideline and does not create a vested right. (Paras 5-8) C) Service Law - Mala Fides - Allegations of mala fides must be supported by concrete evidence - The appellant alleged that the transfer was motivated by personal vendetta. The court found no evidence of mala fides and dismissed the allegation. (Paras 9-10)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the transfer order of the appellant from Raichur to Hyderabad is liable to be quashed on the ground of violation of transfer policy and mala fides.
Final Decision
The appeal is dismissed. The order of the learned Single Judge dated 05.07.2016 passed in W.P.No.205726/2016 is confirmed. No order as to costs.
Law Points
- Transfer is an incident of service
- Courts should not interfere with transfer orders unless mala fides or violation of statutory rules
- Transfer policy is not statutory
- No right to be posted at a particular place
