LAKHAN SINGH Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this petition the Petitioner has challenged the order of transfer, Annexure 7 to the petition. A perusal of the said document would indicate that the Petitioner was posted at Ghaziabad and has been transferred to Lakhimpur Kheri. The transfer order has been challenged, inter alia, on the ground that the said order was in violation of Government order dated 10 -5 -1978 which provided that the transfer will be ordered within the bounds of the district to which the employee belonged.

(2.) IN the counter affidavit it has been maintained on behalf of the opposite parties 1 to 3 that the Petitioner was recommended for posting by the opposite party No. 3 on administrative grounds as is evident from Annexure A -l to the counter -affidavit. A perusal of Annexure A -1 dated 2nd April, 1981 indicates that the Group Commander of the National Cadet Corps Ghaziabad wrote to the Director of National Cadet Corps, U.P. Lucknow that in the interest of efficient functioning of the Head Quarters, the transfer of Sri. Lakhan Singh was necessary. It is stated in Annexure A -1 that the Petitioner is working for the last two years and four months that he was not a willing worker and despite repeated verbal and written counselling during the last one year, he showed little improvement. Most of his Branch's work remained pending and the Petitioner is not amendable to the advice of the Head Clerk. The Group Commander requested that the Petitioner may be posted out at the earliest and some good replacement be posted in his place to enable "this Head Quarter" to keep the pace of word set by the Directorate.

(3.) IT may be noted that under Rule 15 of the Fundamental Rules, any Government employee may be transferred in public interest. The contention of the Petitioner is that inspite of the Government order, Annexure 10 to the petition, dated 10 -5 -1978 the Petitioner has been transferred outside the district. After having heard the learned Counsel for the parties we are of the view that the order of transfer does not violate the Government order, Annexure 10. The said Government order provided that on the recommendation of the Group Commander, class III employees may be transferred outside the Head Quarter. Moreover, the settled view of the Supreme Court is that the High Court should not interfere with an order of transfer merely on the ground that the said transfer order is in contravention of the said Government's directions. Reference in this connection may be made to Shanti Kumari v. Regional Deputy Director Health Services, AIR 1981 SC 1577. In the said case, the High Court declined to interfere with the order of transfer and the order of High Court was upheld by the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court observed that the transfer of a Government servant may be made due to exigencies of service or due to administrative reasons and the Court cannot interfere in such matters. The Supreme Court declined to interfere with the order of transfer even though it was contrary to the State Government's directions. In view of the decision of the Supreme Court referred to above, we are of the view that the order of transfer, Annexure 7 to the petition is not open to challenge. In these circumstances, we are of the view that the order Annexure 7 is not in any manner contrary to the guidelines indicated in Annexure 10 to the petition. But even if there is departure from the directions issued by the State Government contained in Annexure 10, the order of transfer is correct for the reasons indicated in Annexure A -1 to the counter -affidavit. The Petitioner was found not to be a willing worker and despite repeated verbal and written admonitions, he showed no improvement. In these circumstances the transfer of the Petitioner was recommended and he was transferred from Ghaziabad to Lakhimpur Kheri. The Petitioner's transfer has been made in the interest of better working of the Head Quarter and this being the position we do not consider it appropriate to interfere with the order of transfer passed by the appropriate authority.