Patna High Court - Orders
Ramakant Sharma Shandilya & Ors vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 19 January, 2012
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT
PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.497 of 2012
1. Ramakant Sharma Shandilya Son Of Late Daroga Sharma
Resident Of Ramlichak Digha, P.S. - Bataganj, District - Patna
2. Binod Kumar Son Of Late Bhutkan Ram Resident Of Village -
Gayaspur, P.S. Maner, District - Patna
3. Sanjay Kumar Singh Son Of Sudarshan Singh Resident Of Village
- Jivrakhan Tola (Lodipur), P.S. Maner, District Patna
4. Md. Sahid Son Of Late Md, Shabib Resident Of Village - Patut,
P.S. Bikram, District - Patna
5. Nawal Kishore Singh Son Of Late Ram Srinagar Singh Resident
Of Village - Ekawana, P.S. - Punpun, District - Patna
Versus
1. The State Of Bihar
2. The Secretary, Animal And Fisheries Resources Department,
Govt, Of Bihar, Patna
3. The Director, Animal Husbandary, Government Of Bihar, Patna
----------------------------------
2. 19.01.2012Heard learned Counsel for the petitioners and the State.
The petitioners are aggrieved by the order dated 28.12.2011 transferring them to Purnea.
Counsel for the petitioners submits that they are all Class IV employees. A notification dated 24.4.1984 prohibits transfer of Class IV employees except for reasons such as abolition of the post. Being low paid employees they would be put to great hardship if they are transferred from Patna to Purnea. It is submitted that even if Class IV personnel are required, without doing harm to the requirement the respondents can easily first consider transfer from the districts in proximity to Purnea.
The Court concurs with the submission on behalf of the State that the notification dated 25.4.1984 does not impose a complete ban on transfer of Class IV employees. On the contrary, it permits the same for special administrative reasons. The order of transfer is reasoned. It states that personnel were required in the interest and smooth operation of the Goat Breeding Scheme at Purnea. 2 The Court finds no reason to interfere with the order dated 28.12.2011 as it is not possible for the Court to take decisions pertaining to the realm of the administration. There are no violations of statutory provisions alleged, no allegations of malafide and/or loss of seniority, pay or rank.
The petitioners are stated to have represented. It may be considered by the respondents in light of the last submission made on behalf of the petitioners as noticed hereinabove.
The writ application is dismissed.
Snkumar/- (Navin Sinha,J.)