Punjab-Haryana High Court
Jaswinder Singh vs Union Of India And Others on 15 May, 2024
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:068163
CWP-10815-2024 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
118 CWP-10815-2024
Date of Decision : 15..05.2024
JASWINDER SINGH ... PETITIONER
Versus
UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS ... RESPONDENTS
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGMOHAN BANSAL
Present: Mr.Sunny Singla, Advocate
for the petitioner.
Ms. Anita Balyan, Sr.Panel Counsel
for the respondents-UOI.
***
JAGMOHAN BANSAL, J. (Oral)
1. The petitioner through instant petition under Articles
226/227 of the Constitution of India is seeking setting aside of transfer
order dated 26.02.2024 (Annexure P-1) whereby he has been transferred
from Chandigarh to Udhampur.
2. Mr. Sunny Singla, Advocate inter alia contends that
petitioner in 2020 suffered heart attack and thereafter in 2022 paralytic
attack, thus, he ought not to be transferred from Chandigarh to
Udhampur. As per transfer policy dated 27.09.2022 he should be
assigned posting considering his medical condition.
3. Ms. Anita Balyan, Sr.Panel Counsel submits that on account
of medical condition of petitioner, he was twice accommodated. He is a
1 of 3
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:068163
cook and all medical facilities are available at Udhampur. The shifting of
place of posting is not going to adversely effect physical or mental health
of the petitioner.
4. It is settled proposition of law that it is prerogative of the
employer to post its employees as per its choice. No employee can claim
posting at a particular place as a matter of right. The Courts are not
supposed to interfere in the transfer orders until and unless there is grave
miscarriage of justice or abuse of process of law.
5. The Supreme Court in Punjab and Sind Bank and Others
Versus Durgesh Kuwar; (2020) 19 SCC 46, while dealing with question
of transfer has held that an employee cannot have a choice of posting.
Administrative circulars and guidelines are indicators of the manner in
which the transfer policy has to be implemented. An administrative
circular does not confer a vested right which can be enforced by writ of
mandamus. The relevant extracts of the said judgment read as:-
"17. We must begin our analysis of the rival
submissions by adverting to the settled principle that
transfer is an exigency of service. An employee
cannot have a choice of postings. Administrative
circulars and guidelines are indicators of the manner
in which the transfer policy has to be implemented.
However, an administrative circular may not in itself
confer a vested right which can be enforceable by a
writ of mandamus. Unless an order of transfer is
established to be mala fide or contrary to a statutory
provision or has been issued by an authority not
competent to order transfer, the Court in exercise of
2 of 3
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:068163
judicial review would not be inclined to interfere.
These principles emerge from the judgments which
have been relied upon by the appellants in support of
their submissions and to which we have already made
a reference above. There can be no dispute about the
position in law."
6. Considering the factual matrix and above cited judgment of
Supreme Court in Durgesh Kuwar (Supra), this Court does not find it
appropriate to invoke its extraordinary writ jurisdiction, thus, the petition
is hereby dismissed.
7. The petitioner is at liberty to move an appropriate
representation and dismissal of this petition would not inhibit respondents
from sympathetically considering case of the petitioner.
(JAGMOHAN BANSAL)
JUDGE
15.05.2024
anju
Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No
Whether reportable Yes/No
3 of 3
