Mehar Vs. Union of India & Ors  INSC 216 (24 February 1997)
RAMASWAMY, G.T. NANAVATI
O R D
The petitioner was transferred from Kota
to Mumbai on the administrative ground as indicated in the order. The
petitioner approached the Administrative Tribunal. The Central Administrative
Tribunal, Jabalpur by its order dated November 28, 1996 has dismissed the same, Thus this
special leave petition.
counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner was transferred on
compassionate grounds and the transfer is not valid in law. Though he might
have been transferred on compassionate grounds, in view of the express
indication in the order giving reasons for the transfer, i.e., need of
experienced staff at the respective places, the transfer order cannot be said
to be arbitrary. Then it is contended that the petitioner being and officer
belonging to the Scheduled Castes, is entitled to be considered for retention
of his posting nearest his home town. It is true that the instructions have
been issued as reproduced at page No. 18 of the paper book to that effect, yet
they would be subject to the administrative exigencies. IT is stated that the
services of the experienced officer were necessary and so the transfer order came
to be made. It is true that as far as possible, the convenience of the officer
belonging to Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes may be considered and he may
be posted near the home town, but the authority has power to transfer him when
the administrative need arises.
further contended that the petitioner had made allegations against the officers
and the transfer is a vindictive measure of punishment. It is seen that he was
transferred on account of administrative exigencies.
these circumstances, we do not think that there is any justification to
interfere with the impugned order.
petitioner, if so advised and is desirous, may made a representation before the
appropriate authority and the appropriate authority may consider it on merits, The
special leave petitions are dismissed.