NIKUNJA DEKA Vs. ASSAM AGRICUTURAL UNIVERSITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition has been filed by the Assam Agricultural University-Respondent No. 1 to modify the earlier order dated 22/3/1999 passed by this Court in WP(C) 1375/99. By that order operation of the order of transfer dated 18/3/1999 was suspended and the writ petitioner was allowed to continue in his present post of Associate Professor of Agronomy. Faculty of Agriculture, AAU, Jorhat Nomaliy the power of this court to interfere with an order of transfer is absolutely limited and circumscribed. This Court should not interfere with an order of transfer as transfer is the prerogative of the employer. But if it can be shown that the transfer is not in public interest and/or malafide exercise of power, the Court can interfere/step in such a situation. Mr Dutta, learned counsel makes a submission that this order of transfer is a rnalafide exercise of power in view of the displeasure incurred by the petitioner because he tried to make public some misdeeds/mismanagement of the authority and even on 16.3.99 the Board took the following resolution and that resolution is quoted below:

(2.) Mr Dutta, learned counsel further submits that this order of transfer dated 18/3/1999 is in pursuance of this action of the Board and it cannot be deemed to be in the public interest. He further submits that certain appointments were made by the authority in a most arbitrary manner particularly on the personal whims of Vice Chancellor. On the other hand. Mr Lahiri, learned counsel for University produces before me a list of persons appointed as Gr-IV in February, 1999 and from the list it is seen that all these persons are working as M/R worker in the University and no new persons were appointed. This contention of Mr Dutta, learned counsel has no legs to stand upon. But even then, the question remains that whether the order of transfer was by way of punishment or is in the public interest. Mr Dutta, learned counsel in this connection places reliance in (1982) GLR 366 (Lilaram Borah-Vs-Union of India & Ors ) That was a case where an Assistant Aerodram Officer was posted at Guwahati in 1977. certain complaints were received against the petitioner and complaints were enquired and report submitted and thereafter petitioner was transferred to Bombay by order dated 15.12.79. In the order itself it has been stated that he was being transferred on administrative/operational 'grounds", transfer order was challenged on the ground that it was malafide and nothing but an act of victimisation. Respondent-department contended that the enquiry was merely to satisfy the mind of the authority about certain allegations levelled against the petitioner and was not a full-fledged enquiry and order based on finding of arrived at in the course of such enquiry cannot be termed as punitive in nature.

(3.) Mr Lahiri. learned counsel draws my attention that the process of transfer in the case of the petitioner was initiated earlier as will appear from the record produced by him No doubt process was initiated as far back as on 22.2.99 and the name of three persons were placed before the Vice Chancellor on 27.2.99 and the Vice Chancellor ordered that the petitioner may be placed at Gossaigaon This was on 13.1.99 and thereafter order of transfer was issued on 18.3.99.