Surendra Kumar Verma S/O Shri ... vs Canara Bank
2022 Latest Caselaw 5789 Raj/2

          HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
                      BENCH AT JAIPUR

                 D.B. Special Appeal (Writ) No. 995/2022

                                         In

                 S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 11290/2022

   Surendra Kumar Verma S/o Shri Daulat Ram Verma, Aged About
   46 Years, R/o H.N. D-109, Jaat Colony, 200 Ft. Road, Alwar,
   Rajasthan- 301 001. Presently Working As Scale-I Officer In
   Canara Bank, Mandawar Branch, C.O. Jaipur.
                                                         ----Petitioner/Appellant
                                      Versus
   1.     Canara Bank, HRM Section Circle Office, Jaipur Through
          Its General Manager.
   2.     Deputy General Manager, Canara Bank, HRM Section,
          Circle Office, Jaipur Rajasthan.
                                                                   ----Respondents

   For Appellant(s)         :     Mr. Vijay Pathak
                                  Mr. Rajesh Kumar Nigam

HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MR. MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND

Judgment

24/08/2022

Heard.

This appeal arises out of order dated 29.07.2022 passed by

the learned Single Judge whereby writ petition challenging the

transfer order dated 11.05.2022 has been dismissed.

Learned counsel for the appellant would argue that in the

present case, the appellant was posted at the present place of

posting only 11 months before and now in the mid session he has

been transferred to a distant place which is situated at a distance

of 1300 Kms at Bombay. He would further submit that a

(2 of 3) [SAW-995/2022]

representation was also preferred but when no decision was taken

writ petition was filed. He would further submit that in any case

even if no case is made out for interference of this Court, a

direction may be given for consideration of the representation and

appropriate decision be taken.

He would further submit that present is a case of transfer in

the mid academic term which will adversely affect the studies of

appellant's children and for this purpose reliance has been placed

on the judgment delivered by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case

of Director of School Education, Madras and Ors. Vs. O.

Karuppa Thevan and Anr., reported in 1994 Supp. (2) SCC

666.

Interference against an order of transfer, in view of settled

legal position, is permissible only when the transfer order is

inflicted with mala fide or against the provisions of any law or

without jurisdiction. All the grounds which are being raised before

this Court more relate to personal difficulty and inconvenience.

Appellant is not a low paid employee but a Scale-1 Officer.

Therefore, the order of the learned Single Judge does not warrant

any interference in so far as indulgence of this Court is concerned.

We, however, find that serious inconvenience and difficulties

were ventilated through representation against the transfer order.

The appellant has been posted at the present place of posting only

11 months before. Secondly, his children are studying in the

school and he is suffering mid term transfer. Thirdly, he has been

sent to a distant place.

We must hasten to add that administrative exigencies are

always paramount and such inconvenience has to take back seat

in public service. Nevertheless when a representation has been

(3 of 3) [SAW-995/2022]

made it was bounden duty of the authority to apply their mind and

consider whether adjustment was possible in favour of the

appellant looking to various difficulties stated by him. Whenever

an employee is transferred and he has some grievance followed by

a representation made, the authorities are required to apply its

mind and decide the representation one way or other. Such

representation cannot be kept at bay without being considered at

all.

Therefore, though we are not inclined to interference with

the order passed by the learned Single Judge, we direct

respondent No.1 to decide the representation and decision on the

representation be communicated to the appellant. The decision on

the representation shall be taken within a period of three weeks

from the date of submission of certified copy of this judgment.

This order be presented by the appellant before the authority

within ten days from today. Till the order on representation is

passed by the authority, the appellant shall not be compelled to

proceed on transfer nor any coercive steps shall be taken against

him.

The special appeal (writ) accordingly stands disposed of.

(ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J (MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA),ACTING CJ

Ritu/67

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)