STATE OF MANIPUR Vs. KH. SAHANTIBALA DEVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ appeal has been filed by the State challenging the order of learned Single Judge dated 19.05.2016 passed in W.P. (C) No. 183 of 2015. Brief facts of the case are as follows :

(2.) Respondent No. 1 namely, Dr. Kh. Shantibala Devi working as Project Officer was transferred and posted as Specialist (Cattle) District, Veterinary Office, Churachandpur and consequently, Dr. S. Shantikumar Singh, M.V. Sc. (Animal Production), Specialist (Cattle), DVO, Churachandpur was transferred and posted as Project Officer (ICDP), Porompat in Vety. and A.H. Services, Manipur vide order dated 13.02015 which was challenged by the respondent No. 1 primarily contending that posting as Specialist (Cattle) was not in accordance with the Manipur Veterinary and Animal Husbandry Service Rules, 1994 published in the Gazette Notification dated 110.1994. An interim order was passed in favour of the respondent No. 1. Thereafter, reply affidavit was filed by the State as well as the private respondent namely, Dr. S. Shantikumar Singh who is appearing through senior counsel, Mr. A. Bimol. Status-quo is granted. State has filed reply affidavit inter-alia justifying the transfer primarily contending that Rule 20 of the Manipur Veterinary and Animal Husbandry Service Rules, 1994 relating to other conditions of service read with Fundamental Rule 11 entails the Government to pass an order of transfer. It is also contended by the State that both the officers have the same qualifications and therefore, they can be inter transferred between the two.

(3.) It is pleaded by the State that in the D.P.C. the name of Dr. S. Shantikumar Singh was considered for the post of Specialist (Cattle) and similarly, for the 1 (one) post of Project Officer (ICDP), rest of the officers of the earlier D.P.C. including the petitioner were considered thereby, both the two posts are inter transferable. For both posts, the same set of officers were considered in the D.P.C. and as a result, order of transfer inter se writ petitioner and private respondent was justified. The learned single Judge, however, based on the pleading reduced the scope for consideration of the order in the following manner :