This court dismissed a writ petition challenging a transfer order passed against a Group-C employee. The court held that since the petitioner had served for four years, the petition could not survive for consideration under applicable Transfer Guidelines, despite claims of arbitrariness.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
NC: 2024:KHC:7030 WP No. 1409 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM
WRIT PETITION NO.1409 OF 2021 (S-TR)
BETWEEN:
SRI.JAGADISH M S/O MANJUNATH L AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.58, 1ST CROSS I MAIN, V S GARDEN I.P.D SALAPPA LAYOUT BENGALURU – 560 036
Digitally signed by ALBHAGYA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
PRESENTLY ON DUTY AS TAX INSPECTOR OFFICE OF ASSISTANT REVENUE OFFICER CHICKPET SUB-DIVISION BENGALURU-560 053 (UNDER IMPUGNED ORDER OF TRANSFER)
(BY SRI.SHANKAR S. BHAT, ADVOCATE) AND:
…PETITIONER
NC: 2024:KHC:7030 WP No. 1409 of 2021
BENGALURU-560 002
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT.SUVARNA M.L, ADVOCATE FOR R.1 AND R.2)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE TRANSFER ORDER AT ANNEXURE-A PASSED BY THE R-2 DTD 13.01.2021 AND ETC.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
The captioned writ petition is filed assailing Transfer Order dated 13.01.2021 passed by respondent No.2 as per Annexure-A.
order is contrary to the Transfer Guidelines and the petitioner is displaced on the basis of recommendation made by local MLA. The petitioner has also questioned Transfer Order on the ground that the said transfer is being arbitrary one and the same is not approved by the Chief Minister.
the Assistant Revenue Officer (Chickpet), Sub-Division on 03.12.2018. The petitioner claims that he belongs to Group-C category and the tenure is four years.
four years and the fact the petitioner is serving at the present post since 03.12.2018, the petition does not
survive for consideration. In the light of the interim order granted by this Court, petitioner has continued to serve in the said post.
Since petitioner has served for a period of four years, in terms of Transfer Guidelines issued under the Government Order No.DPAR 22 STR 2013 dated 07.06.2013 this petition cannot be kept pending.
For the reasons stated supra, the writ petition is dismissed.
Liberty is reserved to the respondents to effect
transfer in accordance with law.
Sd/-
JUDGE
NBM
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 8
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the writ petition challenging the arbitrary transfer order survives considering the petitioner has completed the statutory tenure of four years.
Whether the transfer order violates Transfer Guidelines when the employee has served for four years.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Sri.Jagadish M
Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike
Deputy Commissioner (Administration)
Sri.Subbarayudu
Sachin Shankar Magadum
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
