Rajendra Prasad vs State Of Uttarakhand & Others

Pankaj Purohit, J

By means of this writ petition, petitioner has challenged the transfer order dated 27.02.2024, annexure-07 to the writ petition, whereby petitioner has been transferred from his present place of posting i.e. District Almora to District Tehri.

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the transfer of the petitioner has been effected due to the reason of upcoming Parliamentary Elections under the guidelines issued by the Election Commission of India on 21.12.2023, annexure-5 to the writ petition. He further submits that reliance placed by the respondents on the guidelines for transferring the petitioner is totally misplaced, as the guidelines do not cover the petitioner, as he is not a district level officer as prescribed in Clause 5.1 of the notification of the Election Commission of India dated 21.12.2023. He also submits that petitioner’s transfer is against the provisions of Uttarakhand Annual Transfer for Public Servants Act, 2017.

Per contra, learned State Counsel has drawn the attention of this Court at Clause 3 of the notification of Election Commission of India, wherein, it has also been prescribed that officer connected directly with elections shall not be allowed to continue in the present district (revenue district) of his posting; (i) if she/he is posted in her/his home district and (ii) if she/he has completed three years in that district during last four years or would be completing three years on or before 30.06.2024.

From bare perusal of the transfer order, it is reflected that the petitioner has been transferred as per the notification of Election Commission of India as petitioner is posted in his home district, which fact is not disputed by the petitioners.

Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and having gone through the notification of the Election Commission of India as well as the impugned transfer order, it is abundantly clear that the petitioner is directly associated with the election work as he deployed in the election duties. Moreover, as stated above, it is, at the risk of reiteration, clarified their stay at their present place of posting belongs to the same district.

In this view of the matter, this Court does not find any infirmity in the impugned transfer order. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed in limine.