ASHOK KUMAR JHA Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ALTHOUGH it is well settled law by judicial pronouncements that transfer is an incidence and a condition of service and it cannot be interfered with unless the action of the authorities is arbitrary, whimsical and mala fide, the instant case is one of the instances which shows how the petitioner has been harassed by the authorities of the respondents by issuing notifications after notifications transferring the petitioner from one place to another place.

(2.) THE petitioner is a member of Jharkhand State Education Services. Vide notification dated 21.6.2007 he was transferred from the post of District Superintendent of Education, Seraikela -Kharsawan to the post of District Superintendent of Education, Palamau and respondent No. 5, who was working as district Superintendent of Education, Palamau, was transferred to the post of Principal, Primary Teachers Training College, Bokaro. Pursuant to the said transfer order petitioner submitted his joining on 26.6.2007 to the Deputy Commissioner, Palamau who accepted his joining and respondent No. 5 was asked to immediately hand over the charge. The petitioner said to have suo motu assumed charge of District Superintendent of Education, Palamau which was counter -signed by the Deputy Commissioner, Palamau and respondent No. 5 was relieved. However, respondent No. 5 challenged the said notification by filing W.P. (S) No. 3510 of 2007 and a Bench of this Court by order dated 9.7.2007 passed interim order and adjourned the case to 25.7.2007 and directed that the till then petitioner (respondent No. 5) shall not be relieved it not already relieved. Pursuant to that interim order, respondent No. 5 who was already relieved started working at Palamau. In the meantime, the authorities issued another notification dated 31.12.2007 by which petitioner was again posted as District Superintendent of Education, Palamau and respondent No. 5 was transferred to District Superintendent of Education, Lohardaga. Petitioner again submitted his joining on 7.1.2008 to the post of District Superintendent of Education, Palamau and his joining was accepted by the Deputy Commissioner, Palamau and his charge report was counter -signed by him on 8.1.2007. Surprisingly, another notification was issued on 16.1.2008 under the signature of respondent No. 3 - the Joint Secretary, Human Resource Development Department, Govt. of Jharkhand, Ranchi by which earlier notification dated 31.12.2007 in respect of the petitioner and respondent No. 5 was cancelled and respondent No. 5 was again posted at Palamau, whereas the petitioner has again been transferred from the post of District Superintendent of Education, Palamau to the post of Principal, Primary Teachers Training College, Simdega. This is not the end of the matter. Petitioner, in obedience of the order canceling his transfer and transferring him to Simdega, submitted his joining at Simdega on 18.1.2008 where he came to know that the post has already been filled up by the existing Principal and there is no vacancy to join. Having no alternative, the petitioner requested respondent No. 2 - the Secretary, Human Resource Development Department, Govt. of Jharkhand for reconsideration of his posting. In this way, petitioner moved from one place to another place by reason of notifications without getting his salary since July, 2007.

(3.) SINCE I am not going to decide the question as to whether transfer and posting of respondent No. 5 is justified, it is not necessary to issue notice to respondent No. 5 and to hear him. As noticed above, all those averments made in the writ petition regarding notifications time to time issued by the respondents have not been denied and disputed by the authorities of the Human Resource Development Department. The arbitrary and mala fide action of the respondents -authorities is apparent from the facts that even after the transfer order was given effect to, the same was cancelled by subsequent notification. Not only that, petitioner was lastly transferred by issuing another notification as Principal Primary Teachers Training College, Simdega although no post was vacant. When this fact was brought to the notice of the respondents, the petitioner was directed to join the Head Quarters and finally an the notification was issued for his posting as Principal, Primary teacher Training College, Simdega. Admittedly, therefore, petitioner has been harassed since June, 2007 and for the aforesaid reason, the petitions has not been paid his salary since July, 2007.