Karnataka High Court
Smt Apeksha Satish Pawar vs The State Of Karnataka on 17 September, 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2024
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA
WRIT PETITION NO. 20730 OF 2024 (S-KSAT)
BETWEEN:
SMT. APEKSHA SATISH PAWAR
W/O KIRAN RAJ
AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS
KAS (JUNIOR SCALE) OFFICER
PRESENTLY WAITING FOR POSTING
DEPARTMENT OF PERSONAL AND
ADMINISTRATIVE REFORMS (DPAR)
BENGALURU-560 001
R/AT. RAMANATH KRUPA
MUNIGAL LAYOUT
MARUTHI SEVA NAGAR
BANASAWADI MAIN ROAD
BENGALURU
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. PRITHVEESH M.K., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
REPRESENTED BY ITS UNDER SECRETARY
SERVICES-2, DEPARTMENT OF PERSONAL AND
ADMINISTRATIVE REFORMS
VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU-560 001
2. THE PROJECT DIRECTOR
NATIONAL HIGHWAY AUTHORITY OF INDIA
NO.6780, NEERUBHAVI, KEMPANNA LAYOUT
HEBBAL, BENGALURU-560 024
-
2
3. SRI. LOKESH D.S.
FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE APPLICANT
AGED MAJOR
WORKING AS SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER
NATIONAL HIGHWAY AUTHORITY OF INDIA
RAMANAGARA, BENGALURU-562 159
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. VIKAS ROJIPURA, AGA FOR R1 & R2;
SRI. D.R. RAVISHANKAR, SENIOR COUNSEL A/W.
SRI. GIRISH KUMAR R., ADVOCATE AND
SRI. T.G. RAVI, ADVOCATE FOR R3)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227
OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO (a) CALL FOR
RECORDS PERTAINING TO THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED
31.07.2024 PASSED BY THE TRIBUNAL IN APPLICATION
No.3126/2024 (ANNEXURE-A), (b) SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED
ORDER DATED 31.07.2024 PASSED BY THE KARNATAKA STATE
ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL AT BENGALURU IN APPLICATION
No.3126/2024 (ANNEXURE-A) AND CONSEQUENTLY ALLOW THE
APPLICATION OF THE PETITIONER AS PRAYED FOR BEFORE THE
TRIBUNAL (ANNEXURE-B).
THIS WRIT PETITION HAVING BEEN HEARD AND
RESERVED FOR JUDGMENT ON 29.08.2024 AND COMING ON FOR
PRONOUNCEMENT OF JUDGMENT THIS DAY, ANU SIVARAMAN
J., PRONOUNCED THE FOLLOWING:
CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN
and
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA
CAV JUDGMENT
(PER: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN) This writ petition is filed against the impugned order dated 31.07.2024 in Application No.3126/2024 passed by
-
3 the Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal, Bengaluru (hereinafter referred to as "Tribunal" for short).
2. The relevant facts of the case are that the petitioner is an officer of 2015 batch of the Karnataka Administrative Services (KAS), was prematurely transferred several times within a short span of her service. The most recent transfer order was passed on 04.07.2024, cancelling her appointment as the Special Land Acquisition Officer, NHAI, Kunigal (NH-207, Hoskote-Dabaspet).
3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that these transfers violate the Transfer Guidelines dated 07.06.2013 and the later guidelines dated 25.06.2024 which mandate a minimum tenure of two years for Group-A officers. The petitioner further argues that the repeated premature transfers have disrupted her professional duties, damaged her reputation, and caused her personal hardship, amounting to a violation of her fundamental rights under Articles 14, 15, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India. The petitioner claims that the State's repeated actions of
-
4 prematurely transferring her and cancelling transfer orders without reasonable grounds amounts to malice, arbitrariness and violation of judicial directives in similar matters.
4. In support of the said contention, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner placed reliance on the following judgments:
• Sri. Rajashekar M v. State of Karnataka and others reported in 2018 SCC OnLine Kar 3777; and • Smt. P.V. Poornima v. State of Karnataka and Others. (WP No.2661/2020 (S-KSAT) D.D. dated 29.07.2020).
5. A memo is placed on record by the learned counsel for the petitioner placing the transfer history of the petitioner's service in a tabular form. It reads as follows:-
Post held by the Period under Remarks petitioner service at the said post Sl.N o.
1. Special Land 16.06.2021 to NA Acquisition Officer, 28.06.2021 Bagalkote [12 days]
2. Chief 28.06.2022 to NA Administrative 04.01.2022 Officer, Karwar [5 months] Institute of Medical Sciences,
-5
Karwar
3. Special Land 05.01.2022 to Acquisition Officer, 02.02.2022 KRIDCL [29 days]
4. Under Secretary, 03.02.2022 to DPAR, State 31.01.2023 Protocol, [1 year] Bengaluru
5. Special Land 01.09.2023 to Smt. Nazma Acquisition Officer, 04.09.2023 challenged the Davanagere [3 Days] posting order of the petitioner in A No. 3960/2023 In which stay was granted on 04.09.2023 and finally allowed on 14.02.2024
6. Waiting for 04.09.2023 to Posting 30.01.2024
7. Chief Operating 31.01.2024 to Smt. Anupama Officer, 03.02.2024 challenged this (Operations), order in A No. KSRLPS, 592/2024. No Bengaluru interim order was granted
8. 03.02.2024, the Petitioner earlier order challenged the posting the cancellation order petitioner stood in A No. 630/2024 cancelled in which status quo was ordered on 06.02.2024 and was finally withdrawn by petitioner on 26.06.2024.
9. Special Land 03.07.2024 to Acquisition Officer, 04.07.2024 NHAI, Kunigal-207
10. 04.07.2024 - the Petitioner
-
6 earlier order dated challenged the 03.07.2024 was order of cancelled cancellation dated 04.07.2024 in A No. 3126/2024 which is dismissed by the impugned order of the Hon'ble Tribunal.
6. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that aggrieved by the order dated 03.02.2024 canceling the order of posting, the petitioner filed O.A. No.630/2024 before the Tribunal, contending that impugned order therein was contrary to the transfer guidelines dated 07.06.2013. The Tribunal noting the grievance of the petitioner herein was pleased to stay the cancellation order dated 03.02.2024. However, believing the oral assurance of the respondent - State to effectuate and ensure her proper posting, she had withdrawn her application on 26.06.2024. It is stated that since O.A. No.630/2024 was withdrawn by the petitioner on the assurance of the respondent - State and the petitioner was waiting for posting in terms of the cancellation order dated 03.02.2024.
-
7
7. The learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that since inception of her service from the year 2021, petitioner was never allowed to complete the minimum tenure attached to the post of Group A Officer on any occasion and has been constantly transferred prematurely. It is also submitted that the petitioner in her entire service history, she has spent long periods of time awaiting posting orders and that there is absolutely no reason or justification for the repeated transfers, modifications and cancellations and that the said proceedings have adversely affected the morale and mental well being of the petitioner.
8. It is also submitted that impugned notification dated 04.07.2024 is wholly illegal since no reasons are assigned for the premature transfer and since there is no approval for the transfer by the Chief Minister and the same is passed neither in public interest nor administrative exigencies and is therefore illegal. It is submitted that it is only to assign a posting of choice to the third respondent that the transfer of the petitioner stood cancelled.
-
8
9. The learned senior counsel appearing for respondent No.3 submits that the applicant does not have any right to insist on a particular posting. When she had not reported for duty and the post in question had not yet been vacated by the incumbent officer, the cancellation of the order of transfer has no effect on the petitioner. It is further stated that third respondent was working as SLAO, NHAI Ramanagar for more than 3 years and was therefore due for a transfer. It is further submitted that the petitioner was working as Chief Operating Officer at Sanjeevini, KSRLPS, Bengaluru from 31.01.2024 and her right to the post of SLAO, NHAI, Kunigal would arise only after the retirement of Smt. K.M.Manorama who attains superannuation on 31.07.2024 and upon her assuming charge of the position.
10. It is submitted that third respondent has been posted to NHAI Kunigal as SLAO vide order dated 04.07.2024 after first respondent cancelling the transfer of the petitioner to the said post. It is further contended that the cancellation of transfer of petitioner vide order dated 04.07.2024 cannot be considered as 'Premature Transfer"
-9
since transfer shall be effectuated on the condition precedent that there shall be vacant post that was going to be created on 31.07.2024 on superannuation of Smt. K.M.Manorama. Hence, the contention of the petitioner on the ground of Premature Transfer is unsustainable.
11. The learned senior counsel appearing for third respondent has placed reliance on the following judgments:-
• N.K. Singh v. Union of India and Others, reported in (1994) 6 SCC 98;
• National Hydroelectric Power Corporation Ltd. v. Shri Bhagwan and Another; reported in (2001) 8 SCC 574; and • State of Haryana and Others v. Kashmir Singh and Another, reported in (2010) 13 SCC 306.
12. We have considered the contentions advanced. It is apparent that in the transfer guidelines dated 25.06.2024, transfer means posting of a Government servant from one post to another. The guidelines also provide the minimum tenure for the different groups of employees.
-
10
13. In the instant case, the petitioner was posted as SLAO 207, Nelamangala on 03.07.2024. The posting was cancelled on 04.07.2024, without assigning any reason whatsoever. The order of cancellation does not even state that it is one issued in administrative exigencies or in public interest. The repeated transfers, to which the petitioner has been subjected since 2015, would go to show that the petitioner has a reasonable grievance with regard to her transfers and postings.
14. In P.V. Poornima's case (supra), a co-equal Bench of this Court was considering a case, where 11 transfer orders have been issued by the State either transferring or modifying transfer orders or withdrawing transfer orders within a span of a year. That was also a case where an order of transfer dated 06.09.2019 was modified on 11.09.2019, even before the incumbent took charge at the transferred place. This Court therefore found that specific reasons are required to be stated for issuing orders for modification or cancellation of transfers with a further requirement that the degree of detail/specific
-
11 reasons would increase with each subsequent modification/cancellation of transfer order, issued prematurely.
15. True, the transfer guidelines have undergone a change. However, according to us, that will not give the State any right to contend that repeated orders of transfer and later modifications or cancellations of such orders are justified even under the new guidelines. In the instant case, there is no whisper of any administrative reason or exigencies or public interest for cancellation of the order. Admittedly, the petitioner was waiting for posting orders after an earlier order posting her at KSRLPS, Bengaluru was withdrawn. Though she had filed an Application before the Tribunal, the same also stood withdrawn and she was awaiting for posting orders. It was while so that the posting was granted to her as SLAO, NHAI, Kunigal on 03.07.2024. We are of the opinion that the cancellation of the said order, even if it had not taken effect, was required to be informed by some reasons. In view of the fact that the petitioner has undergone several transfers, the responsibility of the official
-
12 respondents to give proper reasons for cancellation of the order was much heavier. In the absence of any such reason having been assigned, we are of the opinion that the order for modification of transfer is wholly illegal.
16. Accordingly, we pass the following:-
ORDER
(i) The writ petition is allowed.
(ii) The order of the Tribunal in Application No.3126/2024 dated 31.07.2024 shall stand set-aside.
(iii) The order bearing No.CIASUE 132 ASEV 2024 dated 04.07.2024 (Annexure-A1) impugned before the Tribunal shall also stand set-aside.
(iv) The petitioner shall be accommodated in the post to which she was transferred prior to cancellation of the Order.
(v) Appropriate posting orders shall be granted to the private respondent within two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.
-
13
Pending I.A.No.1/2024 for vacating stay is hereby disposed of.
Sd/-
(ANU SIVARAMAN) JUDGE Sd/-
(G BASAVARAJA) JUDGE cp*