Jayshankar Prasad Kamlesh vs. State Of Chhattisgarh

Held

The Court held that transfer is an incident of service and an employee does not have a fundamental or vested right to claim a transfer or posting of their choice. Executive instructions and administrative directions concerning transfers do not confer an indefeasible right. The needs of the administration and exigencies of service are paramount, and individual convenience is subject to these overarching needs. The Court relied on Supreme Court judgments in S.K. Nausad Rahaman and others vs. Union of India and others and Namrata Verma vs. The State of Uttar Pradesh and others, which established that it is for the employer to transfer an employee considering the requirement, and not for the employee to insist on or resist a transfer. Consequently, the Court found the writ petition to be devoid of merit and dismissed it at the admission stage, also dismissing the interim relief application. The petitioner was granted liberty to file a representation before the respondent authorities.

Facts

The petitioner, Jayshankar Prasad Kamlesh, a Constable in the Excise Department, challenged his transfer order dated June 23, 2022, issued by the Under Secretary, Department of Commercial Tax (Excise), State of Chhattisgarh. He was transferred from Janjgir-Champa to Bilaspur. The petitioner argued that his transfer violated the state's transfer policy, which limits transfers to a maximum of 10% of employees, as approximately 88% of constables had been transferred. He also cited a Finance Department circular dated May 27, 2020, emphasizing financial discipline and preference for transfers based on own expenditure. The petitioner contended that a co-ordinate bench had previously indicated that such grievances would be considered. The State argued that the transfer policy does not confer any right on an employee to remain at a particular posting.

Key Issues

1. Whether the transfer order dated June 23, 2022, issued by the Under Secretary, Department of Commercial Tax (Excise), State of Chhattisgarh, is violative of the State's transfer policy, specifically Clause 2.13 regarding the maximum percentage of employees transferable, and the Finance Department circular dated May 27, 2020, concerning financial discipline and transfer preferences? Petitioner's arguments: The transfer violates the policy limiting transfers to 10% of employees, as 88% of constables have been transferred. The transfer also contravenes the circular emphasizing financial discipline and transfers based on own expenditure. Reliance was placed on a co-ordinate bench's observation in WPS No. 4480 of 2022 (Rajendra Dave Vs. State of Chhattisgarh and others) that individual petitions would be considered. Revenue/State's arguments: The transfer policy does not confer any right upon an employee to remain posted at a particular place for their entire service period.