ANURAG MISHRA Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Pankaj Purohit, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Sri K.N. Joshi, learned Deputy Advocate General appearing on behalf of the State Government.

(2.) The petitioner has invoked the jurisdiction of this Court to issue a writ of certiorari to quash the transfer order dated 18.06.2020 passed by the third respondent, whereby the petitioner was transferred from Dehradun to Bageshwar; for a writ of mandamus commanding respondent nos. 1 to 3 not to interfere with the functioning of the petitioner in the post of Assistant Director, Department of Dairy Development, Dehradun; and to pay him regular salary as admissible in law.

(3.) The petitioner has been working in Dehradun ever since 2014. In accordance with the provisions of the Uttarakhand Annual Transfer For Public Servants Act, 2017 (for short the "Act"?), options were called on 20.04.2019 from those who were liable to be transferred from a sugam area to a durgam area, pursuant to which the petitioner submitted his options for four places i.e. (1) Rudraprayag (2) Champawat (3) Pithoragarh and (4) Bageshwar. It is the petitioner's case that, for the year 2019-20, there was a cap on transfers beyond 10% of the cadre strength; two Assistant Directors were transferred in November, 2019; the petitioner could not, therefore, have been transferred, as any such transfer would fall in excess of the 10% limit; transfers in excess of 10% could only be effected on relaxation being sought, and on the recommendation of the Committee headed by the Chief Secretary under Section 27 of the Act; in terms of Section 23 of the Act, transfers are to be effected only between 25th March till 10th June; for the year 2019-20, the period, for effecting transfer, was extended till the end of June, 2019; the Committee headed by the Chief Secretary took a decision only on 09.01.2020 to transfer the petitioner; the decision of the Committee, headed by the Chief Secretary, required the petitioner to be transferred during 2019-20; despite the relaxation granted by the Committee headed by the Chief Secretary on 09.01.2020, the petitioner was not transferred during the year 2019-20; for the year 2020-21, the State Government had issued two notifications, first on 20.05.2020 and the second on 08.06.2020; by its order dated 20.05.2020, the Government had stipulated that there would be "?Zero' transfers during the year 2020-21; this was reiterated in the notification issued by the Government on 08.06.2020, and the officials were informed that any transgression of the notification would be viewed seriously; and, in such circumstances, transfer of the petitioner to Bageshwar, by the impugned order dated 18.06.2020, is arbitrary and illegal.