R. SRINIVASAN Vs. NATIONAL BUILDINGS CONSTRUCTION CORPORATION LIMITED, A GOVERNMENT OF INDIA ENTERPRISE REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR AND THE ADDITIONAL GENERAL MANAGER, ZONAL HEAD, NATIONAL BUILDINGS CONSTRUCTION CORPORATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is filed against the judgment dated 20th December 2005 in W.P.No. 26883/2005 which was dismissed by the learned single Judge, The appellant is a Project Executive (Civil) in the Nation Buildings Construction Corporation Limited (first respondent). The immediate provocation for filing the writ petition is Annexures -'H', 'K' and 'L' orders. As per Annexure -'H' order dated 2 -11 -2005, the appellant was transferred from the Zonal office, Bangalore to the Water Distribution Project, Port Blair, Andaman and Nicobar Islands with immediate effect and he was directed to report for duty at Port Blair, immediately and in any case not later than 15 -11 -2005. As per Annexure -'K' order dated 19 -11 -2005, the appellant was informed that since he had not reported for duty at Port Blaire and remained on unauthorised absence the competent authority had decided to relieve him from the Zonal Office, Bangalore on the afternoon of 19 -11 -2005 with instructions to report for duty at Port Blaire. As per Annexure -'L' order dated 6 -12 -2005, the appellant was advised once again to report for duty at the new place failing which action as deemed fit would be taken as per NBCC (Disciplinary and Appeal) Rules, 1993. In the writ petition, the main prayer was for quashing the above mentioned orders Annexure -'H', 'K' and 'L'. There was also a prayer for directing the respondents to consider the request of the appellant for voluntary retirement and permit him to retire from service. The writ petition was dismissed at the admission stage holding that no interference was called for with the impugned transfer, However, the prayer of the petitioner for a direction to the respondents to consider his request for voluntary retirement and to permit him to retire from service was not considered by the learned single Judge. Aggrieved by the rejection of the writ petition, the petitioner has filed the present appeal.

(2.) EVEN though the writ appeal has not been admitted a counter statement has been filed on behalf of the respondents.

(3.) IN paragraphs 4, 5 and 6 of the counter statement, the respondents have justified the impugned transfer in the following words: 4. The Respondent Corporation was entrusted with the construction of such a Project to facilitate clean drinking water to the people of Port Blair. It would be pertinent to mention that Port Blair was badly effected by the Killer Tsunami in 2004, the catastrophe had damaged the water treatment facility of the city and the need to provide drinking water was prioritized after the effects of the Tsunami, Accordingly, under the said sanction of the Project, the Corporation commenced work in October 2005 and the same was to be completed within one year. The Corporation has commenced work under a Deputy General Manager and the requirement for a Project Executive/Engineer had arisen.