JAGARNATH PRASAD Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the parties at length.

(2.) PETITIONER has challenged Notification No. 3811 (Bha) dated 31.12.2007 (Annexure 2) by which he has been transferred. He has also challenged the second part of Notification No. 3841 (Bha) dated 31.12.2007 (Annexure 3) by which respondent No. 5 (for short 'R -5') has been posted to work as Incharge in place of petitioner till further order.

(3.) MR . Sumit Gadodia, J.C. to Advocate General, appearing for the State of Jharkhand, submitted that the petitioner's performance at Dhanbad was not found satisfactory and numbers of complaints were received against him from the Deputy Commissioner, Dhanbad. He further submitted that the observance of the said transfer policy is directory and not mandatory as has been held in the Division Bench judgment of the Patna High Court in Man Singh v. The State of Bihar and Ors. 1982 PLJR 368. Referring to another Division Bench judgment of Kailash Bihari Prasad and Anr. v. The State of Bihar and Ors. 1992 (1) PLJR 209, he submitted that Minister -in -charge is competent to alter/modify the recommendations and pass such transfer order as are necessary in public interest and in best interest of administration. He further submitted that no mala fide has been alleged by the petitioner against any one.