Ashok Kumar Tiwari vs State Of Chhattisgarh

We have heard the learned counsel for the Appellant, the learned counsel for the 4th Respondent and the learned Government Advocate

extensively on different aspects of this appeal which arises from the decision of the learned Single Judge refusing to interfere with an order of transfer

of the Writ Appellant / Writ Petitioner from Maniyari Water Resources Division, Mungeli to the Office of the Superintendent Engineer, Water

Resources Division, Bilaspur.

The Appellant/Writ Petitioner was working in Mungeli as Executive Engineer. He was transferred as per order dated 27.10.2017 to Bilaspur. The

4th Respondent, who is an Assistant Engineer, was transferred to Mungeli. The plea of the Appellant/Writ Petitioner is that his transfer from Mungeli

to Bilaspur is a malafide and colourable exercise of administrative power with the sole and oblique motive of providing opportunity for the 4th

Respondent to hold charge of the Office of the Executive Engineer, Mungeli. This is attempted to be buttressed by making reference to the different

judicial precedents which have already been referred to by the learned Single Judge in the impugned judgment.

There is no vested right in any Government servant to be posted at any particular station. The transfer of the Petitioner from Mungeli to Bilaspur

cannot, by itself, be subjected to challenge. There is no allegation of absence of authority in the Joint Secretary, Department of Water Resources, who

issued the transfer order. There is no case that the Appellant has been demoted and parked in any lower category. His payscale is not affected by the

transfer. The plea is that the transfer of the Appellant is an orchestrated activity with the intention to unduly favour the 4th Respondent, who is only an

Assistant Engineer, by creating the avenue to transfer him to Mungeli to be as an Assistant Engineer in the Office of the Executive Engineer; and

thereupon, to let him hold charge of the Office of the Executive Engineer.

The fact of the matter remains that following the order of transfer, the Appellant was to hand over charge to the senior most Assistant Engineer of

Mungeli Division who is Shri Rekh Lal Gautam, Sub Divisional Officer in the Water Resources Sub-Division Pathariya). That gentleman expressed his

inability to take over the duties and responsibilities of the Executive Engineer on the ground of his ill health. That was why the 4th Respondent Shri A.

K. Yadu was made to hold the charge of the Executive Engineer, as and when the Appellant was to move out of Mungeli to Bilaspur on transfer. We

caution ourselves by reminding that we are dealing with a matter of judicial review of such an administrative action, which is entirely within domain of

administrative exigencies, administrative management issues etc.

With the aforesaid, we may also notice that Mungeli and Bilaspur are neighbouring districts; Mungeli having been carved out from Bilaspur district.

There is no unavoidable extraordinary and exceptional personal issue, projected by the Appellant/Writ Petitioner to the extent which it may persuade

the writ Court to take an extraordinary stand in the case in hand.

The learned counsel for the Appellant/Writ Petitioner submits that the post of Executive Engineer in Bilaspur is not available for him to join in terms

of the transfer order. If an official has been transferred from one place to another, it is necessarily the duty of the transferring authority to ensure that

the transferred officer is provided the post to which he has to join. This is purely an administrative matter.

For the aforesaid reasons, we see no ground to interfere with the impugned judgment of the learned Single Judge, which is a well reasoned one.

The writ appeal, therefore, fails.

In the result, this writ appeal is dismissed.