IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2017 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE RAGHVENDRA S. CHAUHAN WRIT PETITION NO. 32603 OF 2017 (S-TR) BETWEEN:
SRI B. C. RAVINDRA S/O. B. G. CHENAPPA, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, CUM TECHNICAL ASSISTANT, OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, BETHAMANGALA SUB DIVISION, BANGARPET TALUK, KOLAR DISTRICT.
(BY SRI A. NAGARAJAPPA, ADV.) AND:
1. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR KARNATAKA URBAN WATER SUPPLY AND DRAINAGE BOARD, JALA BHAVAN, NO.6, I FLOOR, I PHASE, BTM LAYOUT, BANNERGHATTA ROAD, BENGALURU-560 029.
2. KASHIVISHWANATHA M S/O. MADAPPA, ... PETITIONER AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, AEE CUM TECHNICAL ASSISTANT O/O. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, KARNATAKA URBAN WATER SUPPLY BOARD, JALA BHAVAN, NO.6, I FLOOR, I PHASE, BTM LAYOUT, BANNERGHATTA ROAD, BENGALURU-560 029.
(AMENDED AS PER ORDER DATED 01.09.2017) ... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI YOGESH NAIK, ADV. FOR SRI S. G. PANDIT, ADV. FOR R-1;
SRI T. PRASHANTH, ADV. FOR R-2) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 15.7.2017 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT MARKED AS ANNEXURE-C IN SO FAR AS THE PETITIONER IS CONCERNED AND DIRECT THE RESPONDENT TO CONTINUE THE SERVICES OF THE PETITIONER AS ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER/TECHNICAL ASSISTANT AT THE OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, BETHAMANGALA SUB-DIVISION, KOLAR DISTRICT TILL COMPLETION OF MINIMUM TENURE OF SERVICE AS PER GOVERNMENT ORDER DATED 22.11.2001 AND 7.6.2013 VIDE ANNEXURE-D & E.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R With the consent of the learned counsel for the parties, this petition is being decided at the stage of hearing on I.A.
2. Having stayed at Bethamangala Sub-Division for fifteen long years, and still wanting to cling to the same place, despite the transfer order dated 15-07-2017, the petitioner has approached this Court by challenging the order dated 15-07-2017.
3. Briefly the facts of the case are that on 21-02-1985, the petitioner joined the services of the Karnataka Urban Water Supply and Drainage Board (‘the Board’ for short) as an Assistant Engineer. Subsequently on 21-02-1995, the petitioner’s services were regularized on the said post. Thereafter, on 13-04-2015, the petitioner was promoted as Assistant Executive Engineer on in-charge basis, and was posted to Chitradurga Division. By transfer order dated 30-06-2016, the petitioner was transferred from Chitradurga Division to Bethamangala Sub-Division, a place that he had been consistently posted to. Within a period of one year and one month, by transfer order dated 15-07-2017, the petitioner has been transferred from Bethamangala Sub-Division to Jamakhandi Sub-Division in Bijapur District. Hence this petition before this Court.
4. Mr. A. Nagarajappa, the learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that according to the Government Transfer Policy dated 07-06-2013, once a Group-B person is posted at a place, he cannot be transferred for a period of three years. However, the petitioner is being transferred just after completing one year and one month at the Chitradurga Division. Thus, the transfer order is patently in violation of the transfer policy.
5. On the other hand, Mr. T. Prashanth, the learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 1 and 2, submits that already the petitioner has served fifteen long years at Bethamangala. Since there were certain complaints against the petitioner’s work, for administrative exigencies, and in the interest of the public, the petitioner is being transferred from Bethamangala to Jamakhandi. Secondly, the transfer policy promulgated by the State is merely directory, and not mandatory in nature. Therefore, for the smooth functioning of the Board, the Board is at liberty to transfer the petitioner from Bethamangala to Jamakhandi. Thus, the learned counsel for the respondent has supported the impugned transfer order.
6. In catena of cases this Court has opined that a transfer policy is merely a guideline which is directory in nature. Since it is not mandatory, it is not completely binding on the Board or on the employer. An employer would be at liberty to transfer an employee on the ground of administrative exigencies, or in the interest of the public at large. Therefore, the learned counsel for the petitioner is unjustified in claiming that the petitioner cannot be transferred from Bethamangala Sub-Division to Jamakhandi Sub-Division, just within two years of his posting at the Bethamangala Sub-Division.
7. Considering the fact that the petitioner has been posted to Bethamangala Sub-Division for fifteen long years, something is amiss, as a person cannot be posted for fifteen long years at the same place of posting, although such a posting may be periodical.
8. For the reasons stated above, this Court does not find any illegality in the transfer order dated 15-07-2017. Hence this petition is devoid of any merit. It is hereby dismissed. No order as to costs.
Sd/- Judge RD