Karnataka High Court
Sri H S Ranganathawswamy vs State Of Karnataka on 11 January, 2012
Bench: K.Bhakthavatsala, K.Govindarajulu
COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COUR' l W.P 48092/9011 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE. _ . DATED THIS THE 117 DAY OF JANUARY 2012 ON PRESENT: _ SS THE HON'BLE Dr. JUSTICE K.BHAKTHAVATSALA | om a THE HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE K.COVINDARAJULU BETWEEN: -- SRI H § RANGANATHAWSWAMY S/O H M SEETHARAMAIAH ASSISTANT CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS (NOW UNDER COMPULSORY WAITING) R/AT RO: 50, _» 'SAINIVAS', 98D FLOOR, _ YELLAPPA STREET, ~" CHIKKAMAVALLI _. BANGALORE - 560 004 .. PETITIONER (By Sri P A KULKARNI, Adv.) OURT OF KARNATAKAHIGH COURT.OF: KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT AND: 1 STATE OF KARNATAKA ~ W.P48092/2011 REP BY PRINCIPAL SECRETARY BN TO GOVERNMENT, | DEPARTMENT OF FOREST, ENVIRONMENT AND BCOLOGY, | VIKASA SOUDHA, BANGALORE - 560 oo1 PRINCIPAL CHIEF | CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS, GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA _ ARANYA BEAVAN 18T CROSS, MALL ESHWARAM BANGALORE - 360 608 SRI M be CHANDREGOWDA 59 YEARS, 3/O EREGOWDA ASSISTANT CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS, .- R/AT C/O PARAMESHWARA, ADVOCATE, ROTARY SCHOOL ROAD, HASSAN DISTRICT -LAXMIPURAM EXTENSION SAKLESH PUR, . Sri.P.S.RAJGOPAL, Sr.Adv. FOR Sri JAVID HUSSAIN & Sri.M SRINIVASA KUMAR, _ Adv. FOR R3) .. RESPONDENTS
_ : (By Sti.N.B.VISHWANATH, AGA FOR RI & R2;
COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COUR' 3 W.P.48092/2011 This writ petition is filed under Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India praying te Ean the by Hon'ble KAT Bangalore vide Annexure AL --_ This petition coming on for preliminary Sane this day, Dr.K.Bhaktharatsala, J. »made the fouiowing:
This writ. petition é is directed against the order dated 16.02 201 1 made ine app Heation No.6594/2011 on the file of Karnataka Administrative Tribunal at Bangalore. . rs 2 The belief facta of the case leading to the , filing o of ithe writ it petition may be stated as under:
"Respondent No.3 herein filed an application in _ oh No. 06594 /2011 on the file of Karnataka on 7 Administrative Tribunal under Section 19 of the os - Administrative Tribunal Act, 1985 praying for \ \ | ALL 'OURT OF KARNATAKAHIGH COURT. OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT 4 W.P.48092/2011 quashing orders dated 13.09.2011 and 20.99.2011 at Annexures - A2 & A3 on the file of Respondent a No.1 /State, in so far as it relates to bim and direct | | the Respondent No.1 to continue kim | in. the present place. He pleaded that he was working as Assistant Conservator of Forest i in Sekaleshapura sub-division, Hassan District and by onder dated 13/09/2011 as at Annexure-'A2" he was 'tanaferred to the post of Assistant Silviouituriat at Sakaleshpura and by another order. of the Government dated 20.09.2011 (at Annexure - 48) the petitioner herein was posted to the 'place: as 'Assistant Conservator of Forests, a Sakaleshapura Sub-Division.
| _ 3... Statement of petitions were filed, Tribunal _ came to a conclusion that the transfer of Respondent No.3 herein was in violation of Transfer Guidelines and that it was issued only to accommodate the KL COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COUR' $ W.P 48092/2011 present petitioner and _ therefore quashed the _ Annexure ~-- '3' and directed that the Sees | No.3 herein shall be continued as Assistant Conservator of Forests, Sokaleshapura, Sub- Division till his transfer becomes. necessary in the interest of administrative exigencies and in accordance with the transfer guidelines and the present petitioner may be provided an alternative posting. This is impugned in this writ pectin.
- 5 Sei. PAA. Kulkarni, learned counsel oe | appearing for the petitioner submits that the A T ribunal. exceeded its jurisdiction. He relies upon the
- decision reported in (2011) 12 SCC 137 (Registrar . : Genera High Court of Judicature of Madras -vs- : ~ RB Perachi and others} He further submitea that the
- conclusion reached by the Tribunal that the transfer _
-OURT OF KARNATAKAHIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT 6 W.P48092/2011 of Respondent No.3 herein was pre-matured.-a asd Mes of Government Servants is not correct, it ie contended that the transfer of. 'Respondent 5 No. 3 to the office situated at the dietance of 190 feet in the game place, Le, Salcleehpura, there was no impediment for the Respondent. No. 3 herein to accept the transfer order and 'pave way 'for the present petitioner: waiting for posting after repatriation from DPAR. He submite that the impugned order calla for interference by this Court.
b. Sri.s Srinivas Kumar, learned counsel appearing for Respondent No.3 submits that the ms 7 observation made in Para No.9 by the Tribunal Oe 7 cannot be said in excess of its juriadiction as those = - observations came to be made on the basis of the ve TMNT SO SMARNATARA THGP COUKT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COUR 7 WP 48099/0011 Statement of objections filed by Respondent Nos. 1 7 _ and 2 and in the circumstances of "the case. 'He . further submits that the Tribunal was Justified in making an observation that tinere was no "need for disturbing the Respondent No. 3 herein who has completed one year three. teonths of § service in the post and he was also on the he verge of retirement. The Tribunal has oboerved 'that the. Reapondent No.3 herein is experienc ed and competent person to hold the post and - that there \ was a malafide act on the part or the 'Government in transferring Respondent No. 3 herein, . He 2 submits that the decision cited by _ the learned counsel for the petitioner supports the : ease of Reapondent No.3 herein. He submit that the _ *. case of tranefer of Respondent No.3 is contrary to the Be - | Government order dated 22.11.2001 and there ig no
-- illegality or infirmity in the impugned order. | eer ann nm A SH H COURT MMEE MENT GI MARKNALTAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIG Te Rk § WP. 8092/5011
7. As per the full bench decision of t this < & curt rendered on 22.01.2011 in W.P.No. 6851/2010 and connected cases (Mr, Chandrs H N. "vee State of Karnataka and others} the Government order dated 22.11.2001 relating to.. transfer of Government Servants has been hei that it hae got a force of law. It is vehemently contended ty the learned counsel for the petitiones that the impugned transfer order has been made in accordanc oe with the transfer guidelines and there is no > material on record to establish that the. 'impugned erders have been passed contrary to the 'Government order relating to transfer. : ~ guggestion | of the Tribunal to poet the present i > petitiones to the post of Assistant Silviculturist ; instead of disturbing the Kespondent No.3 herein ~~ cannot be said that it has exceeded its jurisdiction \ AL 4 COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COUR 9 W.P.48098/9011 and on such ground the impugned ee cannot | be a herein is on the verge of retirement and that he had ; served only one year three months. as Assistant Conservator of Forests, Sekaleshapura Sub- -Division, and there was no food ground t to transis him from the post of Assisiant Conservator to the post of Assistant Silvicultusiat that too at a . distance of 100 feet from the present place of office No material is placed by the Respondent Nos.1 & 2 to substantiate hia: trane fer. from the present post. Further according to Clause 2 of the Transfer Guidelines
-- "transfer" -means the posting of a Government wos ee vant from one headquartere to another _ - head@qudrters or from one office to another office oe - - within the same headquarters in which he is 7 ~ employed, to take up the duties of a new post or in LC COURT OF KARNATAKAHIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT 10 W.P.48092/2011 consequence of a change of his headquerters, 7 provided in Para Nos.6 & 7, 'there will be no pres matured transfer. Explanation says that pre-mature transfer means transfer made before the completion of the minimum period of. stay at a place specified { in para 3.2 and the minimum and 'the maximum periods of stay specified i in para. 3 3 as the case may be. Keeping iz] view. "the 'definition of transfer in Clause - 2 and the above 'said transfer guidelines it "cannot be. said that it is not a case of pre-mature transfer. in our view, the Tribunal has rightly held that transferring the Respondent No.3 is a case of : presmatuie' transfer and therefore juetified in setting SS : aaide his order of transfer. There is no good ground Se | to interfere with the impugned order. \ } Le i COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COUR 1] W.P 48093/2011 In the result, petition faila and the same te hereby rejected.
Sri N.B.Vishwanth , AGA is, granted - three weeks time to file memo of "appearance for I Respondent Nos.1 & 2. = ;
Sd/-
JUDGE JUDGE