Madras High Court
R.Selvam vs The Director Of Horticulture And ... on 10 October, 2025
Author: R.Suresh Kumar
Bench: R. Suresh Kumar
W.A No. 2876 of 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 10-10-2025
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R. SURESH KUMAR
AND
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR
W.A No. 2876 of 2025 AND CMP NO. 23238 OF 2025
R.Selvam,
Assistant Horticulture Officer, O/o. The Assistant
Director of Horticulture Office, Jolarpettai Block,
Tirupathur District.
..Appellant
Vs
1. The Director of Horticulture and Plantation Crops,
O/o. The Director of Horticulture and Plantation
Crops Department, Chepauk Chennai -600005.
2. The Deputy Director of Horticulture,
O/o. The Deputy Director of Horticuture,
Tirupathur, Tirupathur District.
3. Nagaraj,
Assistant Horticulture Officer, R.S. Mangalam
Block, Ramanathapuram District.
..Respondents
Prayer : Writ Appeal under Clause XV of the Letters Patent to set aside the order
dated 11.08.2025 in W.P.No.29700 of 2025.
For Appellant : Mr.H.Mohammed Imran
M/s.Ajmal Associates
For Respondents : Mr.E.Vijay Anand
Additional Government Pleader
__________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 14/10/2025 04:06:02 pm )
Judgment
(Judgment of the Court was delivered by R.Suresh Kumar J.)
This intra Court appeal has been directed against the order passed by the
learned Writ Court dated 11.08.2025 in W.P.No.29700 of 2025. In the said writ
petition, the transfer order made against the petitioner / appellant dated
01.07.2025 and the relieving order dated 24.07.2025 were under challenge.
2. The appellant / writ petitioner is an Assistant Horticulture Officer who
has been subjected to transfer order issued by the second respondent dated
01.07.2025, whereby about eight persons including the writ petitioner had been
transferred to various places. While considering the said writ petition, the learned
Writ Court, having taken note of the fact that at least from 11.07.2022 till
01.07.2025 for more than three year since the petitioner / appellant had been
working in the present station ie., Jolarpettai, from where he has been transferred
to R.S.Mangalam at Ramanathapuram District, he cannot have any grievance.
Therefore, on that ground the writ petition was dismissed.
3. Though against the said order the present writ appeal has been filed, after
hearing the learned counsel for the appellant as well as the learned Additional
__________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 14/10/2025 04:06:02 pm )
Government Pleader for the official respondents and going through order
impugned as well as the impugned orders of transfer and relieving order before the
Writ Court, we find that though in the order of transfer dated 01.07.2025 it has
been specifically mentioned that out of the eight transferees regarding five
transferees no transfer allowance would be given since those transferees had been
given transfer orders only on their requests, one among such transfer is one
P.Nagaraj, who was originally working at R.S.Mangalam had been transferred
and posted, where the petitioner was working ie., Jolarpettai and the appellant
petitioner since has been transferred to R.S.Mangalam.
4. Therefore, it became apparently clear that only in order to accommodate
the said P.Nagaraj at Jolarpettai, the appellant / writ petitioner who was working
there got transferred to R.S.Mangalam. Therefore, it cannot be stated as a
regular or routine administrative transfer on any exigency or contingency. The
transfer order though was put under challenge unsuccessfully, the factual position
would be that, pursuant to the transfer order dated 01.07.2025, a relieving order
also has been passed on 24.07.2025 and admittedly the writ petitioner / appellant
got relieved on the said date and he joined in the transferred place at
__________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 14/10/2025 04:06:02 pm )
R.S.Mangalam. Therefore, at this point of time we do not wish to interfere with
the transfer order dated 01.07.2025 as well as the relieving order.
5. But, at the same time since the original transfer order dated 01.07.2025
insofar as the writ petitioner / appellant is concerned is not passed on any
administrative exigency, if any request is made by the writ petitioner / appellant
in future by making any representation, the same can be considered objectively by
the respondent employer to accommodate him either in Tirupathur District or any
other nearby District, depending upon the vacancy position.
6. With the above observation, this writ appeal is disposed of. No costs.
Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
(R.S.K.,J.) (H.C.,J.)
10-10-2025
Index: Yes/No
Speaking/Non-speaking order
Neutral Citation: Yes/No
KST
__________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 14/10/2025 04:06:02 pm )
To
1. The Director of Horticulture and Plantation Crops,
O/o. The Director of Horticulture and Plantation
Crops Department, Chepauk Chennai -600005.
2. The Deputy Director of Horticulture,
O/o. The Deputy Director of Horticuture,
Tirupathur, Tirupathur District.
__________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 14/10/2025 04:06:02 pm )
R.SURESH KUMAR J.
AND
HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR J.
KST
AND
CMP NO. 23238 OF 2025
10-10-2025
__________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 14/10/2025 04:06:02 pm )
