Allowed

Shanthakumar.K.J. v. The Principal Chief Conservator of Forest

Madras HC8 Nov 2022WP(MD)/11090/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court dismissed a writ petition challenging a transfer order for the petitioner, a forest officer. The Court held that an order transferring an employee to a specific circle is valid even if it does not specify the exact place of posting, as salary is guaranteed and the substantive mandate is compliance.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner held not entitled to quash transfer; directed to report to Villupuram Circle HQ and join duty. Petitioner permitted to submit representation for posting in nearby circle.

Shanthakumar.K.J. Vs The Principal Chief Conservator… — Service and Employment | Madras HC (2022)

¶1

W.P.(MD)No.11090 of 2022

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 08.11.2022

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN

¶6

W.P.(MD)No.11090 of 2022 and W.M.P(MD)Nos.7947, 7948, 7950 & 12836 of 2022

¶7

K.J.Shanthakumar ... Petitioner

¶8

¶9

1.The Principal Chief Conservator of Forest, Office of the Principal Chief Conservator of Forest, Chennai.

¶10

2.The Conservator of Forest, Office of the Conservator of Forest, Villupuram Circle, Villupuram District, Villupuram.

¶11

3.The District Forest Officer, Office of the District Forest Officer, Theni Forest Division, Theni District, Theni. ... Respondents

¶12

Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorari, to call for the records relating to the impugned order of the first respondent in Ref.No.B2/0157/2022-23 dated 20.05.2022 and consequential impugned order of the third respondent in

¶13

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶14

1/5

¶15

W.P.(MD)No.11090 of 2022

¶16

Na.Ka.No.5488/2022/Pa1 dated 21.05.2022 and that of the second respondent in Employment Order No.33/2022/Pa dated 21.05.2022 and quash the same.

¶17

For Petitioner : Mr.M.Ajmal Khan Senior Counsel for Mr.K.Appadurai For Respondents : Mr.R.Ragavendran Government Advocate

¶18

ORDER

¶19

Heard the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the writ petitioner and the learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents.

¶20

The writ petitioner was working as Forester in Theni Circle. He was

¶21

promoted as Forest Range Officer and posted at Villupuram Circle vide proceedings dated 20.05.2022 issued by the Principal Chief Conservator of Forest. The said order was put to challenge in this writ petition. This Court vide order dated 09.06.2022 granted an order of interim stay on the ground that in the transfer order, no specific place of working was mentioned. Instead of complying with the said interim order, the petitioner was posted at Cuddalore Range. That led to the filing of Contp(MD)No.1233 of 2022.

¶22

When this Court had granted an order of interim stay the question of posting the petitioner at Cuddalore instead of reposting him at Theni Circle

¶23

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶24

2/5

¶25

W.P.(MD)No.11090 of 2022

¶26

prima facie appears to be an act of contempt. However, the learned Senior Counsel submitted that he would not pursue the contempt petition and be satisfied if the petitioner’s request for posting in a nearby circle is considered.

¶27

Coming to the merits of the matter, I am of the view that there is no substance in the contention that non specification of the place of working would invalidate the transfer order. The transfer order dated 20.05.2022 clearly mentioned that he has been transferred to Villupuram Circle and necessary posting order will be issued by the Conservator of Forest in the existing vacancy place or vacancy created due to transfer of incumbants. In other words, the mandate given to the petitioner was to report to the headquarters at Villupuram Circle. His posting would be decided later. The petitioner can complain only if he is not paid the monthly salary. So long as the petitioner’s monthly salary is guaranteed he cannot have any grievance. Therefore, the contention advanced by the writ petitioner does not appeal to me. The transfer order impugned in this writ petition is sustained. The petitioner shall report for duty forthwith and join in the place in respect of which posting order is be issued. The petitioner is permitted to submit representation to the first respondent. The first respondent shall take note of the contents set out therein and consider posting the writ petitioner in a nearby circle. The order to be passed on the proposed representation cannot be questioned.

¶28

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 3/5

¶29

W.P.(MD)No.11090 of 2022

¶30

This writ petition is disposed of. Consequently, connected

¶31

miscellaneous petitions are closed. No costs.

¶32

08.11.2022

¶33

Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes/ No mga

¶34

¶35

1.The Principal Chief Conservator of Forest, Office of the Principal Chief Conservator of Forest, Chennai.

¶36

2.The Conservator of Forest, Office of the Conservator of Forest, Villupuram Circle, Villupuram District, Villupuram.

¶37

3.The District Forest Officer, Office of the District Forest Officer, Theni Forest Division, Theni District, Theni.

¶38

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶39

4/5

¶40

W.P.(MD)No.11090 of 2022

¶41

G.R.SWAMINATHAN, J.

¶42

mga

¶43

W.P.(MD)No.11090 of 2022

¶44

08.11.2022

¶45

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶46

5/5

Shanthakumar.K.J. v. The Principal Chief Conservator of Forest

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shanthakumar.K.J. v. The Principal Chief Conservator of Forest

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

J.Vijila, Vs the Secretary to the

Subramanian.a Vs The State of Tamil Nadu

A.Sivaniah Vs Arasu Rubber Corporation

P. Manoharan Vs State Bank of India

B.Lakshmi, Vs the Alagappa University

Selvam .a Vs The Principal Chief Conservator of Forests