Kallu Prasad vs State of U.P. and Others

N.K. Mehrotra, J.

This is a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution for issuing a writ of certiorari quashing the impugned transfer order dated 6.12.2003 as contained in Annexure No.1. The petitioner is working on the post of Farm Superintendent Attarra Banda. By the impugned transfer order he has been transferred to Ghaghra ghat, Bahraich. It is alleged that the opposite party No.5 Shri Bechan Ram Verma has been posted at Attarra Banda, for more than 11 years and whenever he has been transferred he has got his transfer cancelled and continued at Attarra. The petitioner was posted in his place vide order dated 22.9.2003 and now within a period of three months he has been transferred to Ghaghra Ghat, Bahraich. When the opposite party No.5 was transferred from Attarra vide order dated 15.6.2003, the opposite party No.5 had preferred a writ petition before this High Court at Allahabad challenging his transfer but no stay order was passed by this Court. Thereby opposite party No.5 used his political connections and got his order of transfer to District Bahraich cancelled and the petitioner has been transferred at the instance of opposite party No.5. The transfer order is in the mid session and the study of his children would suffer. He has been transferred on the recommendatory letter of Shri Daddu Prasad, Member of Legislative Assembly as contained in Annexure No.6.

It is well settled that this Court can interfere with an order of transfer under Article 226 of the Constitution on very limited grounds, namely, that the transfer order has been passed contrary to any statutory provision or has been passed by a person who has no authority to do so or is malafide. (See Mrs. Silpi Bose v. State of Bihar, AIR 1991 SC 532 and Union of India v. S.L.Abbas, Air 1993 SC 2444). In the facts and circumstances of the present case no such ground has been made out which may warrant interference by this Court. At the same time I am of the view that frequent transfer order even after a short period without having any administrative ground on the recommendations of the political persons, always be discouraged and at the change of the political masters the officers should not be caused inconvenience by passing the order of transfers from one place to another unless very strong reasons are there. It is the bureaucracy consists of civil servants who can improve the system by advising properly to the political masters who run the Government in democracy.

In my opinion the proper remedy for the petitioner is to make a representation to the authority concerned setting forth the ground on which he wants that the impugned transfer order be set aside/cancelled. It is accordingly directed that if the petitioner makes a representation to the Principal Secretary agriculture opposite party No.1 within a period of ten days from today, the same shall be decided expeditiously preferably within a period of fifteen days from the date of filing of a certified copy of this order along with the representation before him.

Subject to the observation made above, the writ petition is dismissed.

(Petition dismissed)