RAJ KUMAR JHA Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) OA Nos. 2135/2012, 2136/2012 and 2137/2012 filed by applicants questioning the Order dated 25.06.2012 whereby they were transferred from NCT of Delhi to DD&DHI, A&NI and Lakshadweep were disposed of in terms of Order dated 3.07.2012 with a direction that the representation, if any, preferred by applicants within one week would be decided by respondents expeditiously. Respondents were also directed not to give effect to the transfer order qua the applicants till disposal of said representations. Pursuant to said order, applicants made separate representations dated 9.07.2012 raising the common plea and praying for cancellation of their transfer ordered in terms of Order No. 14020/2/2011 -UTS -II (Part file) dated 25.06.2012. The representations were addressed to the Secretary, Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India. Relying upon the guideline for transfer of posting of DAMPS officer, Rules 12 and 13 of DANIPS Rules, 2003 and letter dated 23.06.2012 of DD & DNH administration as well as also on the decision of this Tribunal in OA No. 2785/2010 filed by Shri Udai Vir Singh Rathi, the Secretary, Ministry of Home Affairs passed separate Order Nos. 14040/34/2012 -UTS.II dated 12.07.2012 rejecting the aforementioned representation preferred by applicants. The applicants have filed present Original Applications questioning the said Order No. 14020/2/2011 -UTS -II (Part file) dated 25.06.2012 of their transfer out of Delhi and the Order No. 14040/34/2012 -UTS.II dated 12.07.2012 passed in saliently on the following grounds: - -

(2.) AS far as the first question is concerned, it would be pertinent and material to refer to Article 77(1) of the Constitution of India in terms of which all executive action of the Government of India shall be expressed to be taken in the name of the President. In terms of Article 53(1) of the Constitution, the executive power of the Union shall be vested in the President and shall be exercised by him either directly or through officers subordinate in accordance with the Constitution. For easy reference, said Article is extracted hereinbelow:

(3.) IN Sanjeevi Naidu etc. etc. v. State of Madras and Another, : AIR 1970 SC 1102, a Constitution Bench of Hon'ble Supreme Court viewed that neither the Councils of Ministers nor an individual Minister can attend to the numerous matters that come up before the Government. Those matters have to be attended to and decided by various officials at various levels. When those officials discharge the functions allotted to them, they are doing so as limbs of the Government and not as persons to whom the power of the Government had been delegated. In Halsbury Laws of England Vol. I 3rd Edn. I page 70, it is observed: