Jharkhand High Court
Raj Narayan Sarswat vs The State Of Jharkhand on 30 January, 2025
Author: Ananda Sen
Bench: Ananda Sen
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
W.P.(S) No. 6126 of 2024
Raj Narayan Sarswat, son of Bipin Bihari Lal, Disrict Dairy Development
Officer, Dumka, resident of D. Type 02,, Government Residential Quarter,
Gilan Para, Dumka, District- Dumka. .... Petitioner
Versus
1. The State of Jharkhand
2. The Secretary, Department of Agriculture, Animal Husbandry and Co-
operative, Government of Jharkhand, Nepal House, Doranda, Ranchi.
3. The Director (Dairy) Dairy Development Directorate, Jharkhand, Campus of
Farmers Training Centre, Dhurwa, Ranchi.
4. The Deputy Secretary, Department of Agriculture, Animal Husbandry and
Co-operative, Government of Jharkhand, Nepal House, Doranda, Ranchi.
5. The Deputy Commissioner, Dumka. .... Respondent(s).
------
CORAM : SRI ANANDA SEN, J.
------
For the petitioner(s): M/s Sanjay Kumar and Lalan Kr. Singh, Advocates.
For the respondent(s): Mr. Suresh Kumar, SC (L&C)-II
Mr. Anshuman Kumar, AC to SC (L&C)-II
------
04/30.01.2025: In this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for quashing of
Notification No. 1 Stha. Atirikt Prabhar 01/2017 Pa.Pa 1119 as well as Memo
No. 1120 dated 15.10.2024 (Annexure-5) , whereby the petitioner has been
transferred from the District Dairy Development Officer, Dumka to the District
Dairy Development Officer, Chaibasa, West Singhbhum.
2. Counsel for the petitioner submits that just on the day, the election
was announced, the petitioner has been transferred without taking permission
from the Election Commission. He further submits that on the same District,
the persons, who are languishing for more than eight to ten years, they have
not been transferred.
3. I have gone through the transfer order. From the Transfer Order, I
find that it is simplicitor transfer without alleging any mala fide intention or any
imputation.
4. Further during course of argument, it has been brought notice to
this Court that the petitioner has remained in Dumka for more than eight years
in different capacity/ranks, thus he has been transferred. Further in Paragraph
9 of the counter affidavit, the State has submitted that vide letter No. 4461
dated 1.8.2024, the Chief Election Officer-cum-Secretary, Department of
Cabinet Election wrote the Chief Secretary, Govt. of Jharkhand requesting to
transfer the officials who have been posted in a particular district in terms of
Clause 3(ii) of the Letter dated 31.7.2024. As per the said letter, no officer
connected directly with elections shall be allowed to continue in the present
district (revenue district) of posting, if he/she is posted in home district and
he/she has completed three years in that district during last four years or
would be completing three years on or before 31 st December, 2024. Para 9 of
the counter affidavit, reads as under:-
"9. That it is humbly stated that vide letter No. 4461 dated
01.08.2024, the Chief Election Officer-cum-Secretary, Department
of Cabinet Election wrote the Chief Secretary, State of Jharkhand
therein inter alia requested the tranfer of officials who have been
posted in a particular district in terms of the clause 3(ii) of the
Letter dated 31.07.2024 wherein the following was stated:-
3. Hence, the Commission has decided that no officer
connected directly with elections shall be allowed to
continue in the present district (revenue district) of
posting:-
(i) If she/he is posted in her/his home district.
(ii) If she/he has completed three years in that
district during last four (4) years or would be
completing 3 years on or before 30 th September
2024 for UT of Jammu and Kashmir, 31 st October,
2024 for Haryana, 30th November, 2024 for
Maharashtra and 31st December, 2024 for
Jharkhand.
While calculating the period of three
years, promotion to a post within the
district to be counted."
5. Admittedly, the petitioner has remained in Dumka for more than
eight years, thus he has been transferred. As held above, the transfer order is
not a mala fide order as transfer is an incident of service.
6. Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Public Services Tribunal
Bar Assn. v. State of U.P. and Another, reported in (2003) 4 SCC 104 at
para 37 held as under:-
"37. Transfer is an incident of service and is made in
administrative exigencies. Normally it is not to be interfered
with by the courts. This Court consistently has been taking a
view that orders of transfer should not be interfered with
except in rare cases where the transfer has been made in a
vindictive manner."
Further Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of High Court of
Judicature of Madras v. R. Perachi, reported in (2011) 12 SCC 137, there is
no scope of judicial review if the transfer is made on administrative ground
without attaching any stigma.
7. In view of the facts of this case as well as the Judgment of the
Hon'ble Supreme Court, I am not inclined to entertain this writ petition.
Accordingly, the same is dismissed.
8. Pending interlocutory application, if any, is also disposed of.
Anu/-Cp2. (ANANDA SEN, J. )
