MUKESH KUMAR Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this writ petition the petitioner has called into question the transfer order dated 11.03.2006 wherein the petitioner was transferred to Burnpur as Manager Civil(Maintenance). Adumbrated in brief the petitioner's case is this. Petitioner belongs to scheduled caste. The petitioner joined Steel Authority of India on 10.06.1991 at Rourkela as Management Trainee (Admn.). He took training at various places like Burnpur and Calcutta. On completion of his training he was posted in December 1991 at Delhi as Sales Executive, in December 1992, he was transferred to Batala, Punjab, in February 1995, he was transferred to Chandigarh, in September 1996, he was transferred to Burnpur and again in June 2000 to Delhi. Before his transfer in March 2006 he was working as Manager (Sales " Delhi Stock Yard) ISP. In February 2006 ISCO was dissolved. All employees working in Sale Department throughout India were transferred to Central Marketing Organisation and were posted at the same station except the petitioner who was transferred to Burnpur. It is averred that the respondents no. 2 and 3 are not following any proper transfer policy and it appears that their best policy is the policy of whims and fancy and pick and choose. From the list submitted by the petitioner with the writ, it appears that some officials are working at one station for last 7 years to 18 years.

(2.) The respondents have contested this application. I have heard the counsel for the parties at length. Both the parties have also filed the written synopsis as well. The most telling argument urged by the learned counsel for the petitioner was the petitioner sought permission of the competent authority to join M.B.A.(part-time) three years course for the session 2004-2007 in Faculty of Management Studies, University of Delhi. Permission was granted on 22.04.2004 The petitioner has already completed two years course and the petitioner has yet to attend classes for one year more. The permission letter does not state that the petitioner could be transferred out of Delhi within the period of three years. It is averred that had it made clear while granting permission, petitioner would not have joined the course. Again, his MBA course will complete by 2006-07 academic year. It was prayed that under these circumstances the transfer order should not have been passed till March- April 2007 i.e. after the completion of his MBA course.

(3.) His arguments reveal a lack of realism. He has attempted to evade truth by a quibble. The permission was granted to the petitioner vide letter dated 22.04.2004 subject to the following conditions :- "Kindly refer to your application dated 31.03.2004 addressed to GM(PandA) requesting for grant of permission for admission to MBA (part-time) course for the session 2004-2007 from the Faculty of Management Studies, University of Delhi. We are pleased to inform you that the Competent Authority has acceded to your request and has allowed you to join the said course for the session 2004- 2007 subject to the following conditions:-