YOMTUM ETE Vs. STATE OF ARUNACHAL PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE order of transfer dated 27. 07. 2008 (issued on 30. 07. 2008) passed by the Secretary (Power), Government of Arunachal Pradesh, Itanagar, transferring the petitioner, who is an Assistant Engineer (Eandm), from Eandm Sub-Division, Aalo to Bomdila, Department of Hydro Power Development, in place of the respondent No. 3, has been challenged by the appellant in W. P. (C) No. 304 (AP)/08 on the ground of violation of the relevant policy guideline formulated by the Government of Arunachal Pradesh, inasmuch as the appellant has not completed 4 (four) years of his tenure as Assistant Engineer in Aalo as well as on the ground of malafide and arbitrary exercise of the power as the same has been exercised just to accommodate the respondent No. 3 in Aalo. The said writ petition has been dismissed by the learned Single Judge vide order dated 14. 08. 2008 and hence, the present appeal.

(2.) WE have heard Mr. K. N. Choudhury, the learned Sr. counsel for the appellant as well as the learned State Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 and Mr. A. K. Goswami, the learned Sr. Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent No. 3.

(3.) THE learned State Counsel, on the contrary, has submitted that the order of transfer has been passed in public interest and keeping in view the difficulty being faced by the respondent No. 3 and on the basis of his representation submitted before the Secretary (Power) seeking transfer from Bomdila to a place nearer to his home on the ground that his father recently had undergone bypass surgery, for which it has become necessary to look after him. According to the learned State Counsel, there is nothing illegal in recommending the case of the respondent No. 3 by the local M. L. A. as well as by the Minister. It has further been submitted that the transfer policy circulated vide circular dated 02. 06. 1998 read with circular dated 28. 02. 2002 do not totally debar the authority from transferring an officer before completion of 4 (four) years tenure in a particular place of positing and the authority on compassionate and health ground with the approval of competent authority can transfer such an officer before completion of such period. The Government being the model employer has to look into the difficulties being faced by its officers/employees and, therefore, it cannot be said that the power of transfer has been exercised arbitrarily and in violation of the transfer policy, submits the learned State Counsel. It has further been submitted that the appellant in the writ petition has not alleged any malafide against any one and the case of the appellant in the writ petition is only that the impugned transfer is in breach of the guidelines and policy formulated by the Government of Arunachal Pradesh.