M ANNAPOORANAM Vs. DISTRICT COLLECTOR AND ORS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Petitioner who is working as a Driver in the Respondent Transport Corporation, has come forward to challenge an order of transfer, dated 16.09.2010, wherein and by which the Petitioner was transferred from Usilampatti Branch to Thirupuvanam Branch. The same order relates to two other drivers also.

(2.) The contention of the Petitioner was that transfer order was a non speaking order. There was no application of mind. It was issued with malafide intention. The transfer order issued during the middle of the academic period is invalid and it is opposed to Wednesbury's principle of unreasonableness and also it is contrary to Article 19(1)(d) of the Constitution of India. The Petitioner had further stated that his wife is having treatment at Usilampatti and he has school going children, whereas in the same depot, there are workers who do not have any school going children.

(3.) It is not clear as to how these facts can be relevant in impugning the transfer order. On the other hand, the Petitioner who is a driver in the Respondent Corporation has been working for more than 10 years in the same depot. The transfer order cannot be impugned only on the ground that it does not give any reason. One is not expected to write reasons for transfer. In the absence of any personal malafide against the Respondents, the transfer order cannot be impugned by the Petitioner. Under the relevant Standing Order, an employee of the Corporation is entitled for transfer from one branch to an another branch and from one depot to an another depot.