Quashed

K.Krishnan v. The Director of Collegiate Education (Fac)

Madras HC19 Oct 2023WP(MD)/20678/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madurai Bench of Madras High Court set aside an impugned transfer order issued against the petitioner, a government arts college employee. The court held that the transfer, alleged to be based on caste division complaints and effectively in lieu of punishment, was punitive and illegal under the Somesh Tiwari principle.

What did the court decide?

The impugned transfer order dated 21.08.2023 was set aside. The authorities are at liberty to proceed further in accordance with law.

K.Krishnan Vs The Director of Collegiate Education (Fac) — Service and Employment | Madras HC (2023)

¶1

W.P.(MD).No.20678 of 2023

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 19.10.2023

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.VIJAYAKUMAR

¶6

W.P(MD)No.20678 of 2023 and W.M.P(MD) Nos.17108 and 20194 of 2023

¶7

K.Krishnan ... Petitioner

¶8

Vs.

¶9

The Director of Collegiate Education (FAC) Institute of Advanced Study in Education Campus, 577, Anna Salai, Saidapet,

¶10

Chennai – 15.

¶11

The Regional Joint Director of Collegiate Education, Office of the Regional Joint Director of Collegiate Education, Madurai Region, Madurai District.

¶12

The Principal, Raja Doraisingam Government Arts College, Sivagangai, Sivagangai District.

¶13

Mr.K.Duraiarasan The Principal, Raja Duraisingam Government Arts College, Sivagangai, Sivagangai District. ... Respondents

¶14

1/6

¶15

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

¶16

PRAYER:

¶17

W.P.(MD).No.20678 of 2023

¶18

PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorari to call for the records pertaining to the impugned order in Na.Ka.No.1790/T2/2023, dated 21.08.2023 on the file of the first respondent and quash the same as illegal.

¶19

For Petitioner : Mr.T.Aswin Rajasimman For M/s.Lajapathi Roy and Associates

¶20

For Respondents

¶21

: Mr.V.Omprakash Government Advocate For R1 and R2

¶22

O R D E R

¶23

The present Writ Petition has been filed by the head of the Economic Department of the Government Arts College at Sivagangai challenging the order of transfer, dated 21.08.2023.

¶24

2. The said transfer order has been challenged on the ground that it is punitive in nature.

¶25

3. A perusal of the impugned order indicates that the writ petitioner has been transferred from Arts College at Sivagangai to another Arts College at Coodalore. The impugned order further points out that transfer has been

¶26

2/6

¶27

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

¶28

W.P.(MD).No.20678 of 2023

¶29

effected due to the fact that the writ petitioner had induced caste division among the faculty members and the students and a complaint has been lodged by the Principal to the first respondent.

¶30

4. Therefore, it is clear that the order impugned in the writ petition

¶31

makes a serious allegation as against the writ petitioner and it is punitive in nature.

¶32

5. On 18.10.2023, this Court had instructed the respondents herein to explore the possibility of recalling the present order and posted the matter today i.e., on 19.10.2023, at 2.15 p.m. On instructions, the learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents 1 and 2 submits that orders may be passed on merits.

¶33

6. The judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court reported in (2009) 2 SCC 592 (Somesh Tiwari Vs.Union of India and others) in paragraph No.16 has held as follows:

¶34

“16. Indisputably an order of transfer is an administrative order. There cannot be any doubt

¶35

3/6

¶36

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

¶37

W.P.(MD).No.20678 of 2023

¶38

whatsoever that transfer, which is ordinarily an incident of service should not be interfered with, save in cases where inter alia mala fide on the part of the authority is proved. Mala fide is of two kinds - one malice in fact and the second malice in law. The order in question would attract the principle of malice in law as it was not based on any factor germane for passing an order of transfer and based on an irrelevant ground i.e. on the allegations made against the appellant in the anonymous complaint. It is one thing to say that the employer is entitled to pass an order of transfer in administrative exigencies but it is another thing to say that the order of transfer is passed by way of or in lieu of punishment. When an order of transfer is passed in lieu of punishment, the same is liable to be set aside being wholly illegal.”

¶39

7. In view of the above said reasons, the impugned transfer order in the

¶40

writ petition is hereby set aside. However, the authorities are at liberty to proceed further in accordance with law.

¶41

4/6

¶42

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

¶43

W.P.(MD).No.20678 of 2023

¶44

8. With the above said observations, this writ petition stands allowed. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed.

¶45

19.10.2023

¶46

NCC : Yes/No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No ebsi

¶47

¶48

The Director of Collegiate Education (FAC) Institute of Advanced Study in Education Campus, 577, Anna Salai, Saidapet, Chennai – 15.

¶49

The Regional Joint Director of Collegiate Education, Office of the Regional Joint Director of Collegiate Education, Madurai Region, Madurai District.

¶50

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

¶51

5/6

¶52

W.P.(MD).No.20678 of 2023

¶53

R.VIJAYAKUMAR,J.

¶54

ebsi

¶55

W.P(MD)No.20678 of 2023

¶56

19.10.2023

¶57

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

¶58

6/6

K.Krishnan v. The Director of Collegiate Education (Fac)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K.Krishnan v. The Director of Collegiate Education (Fac)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Gopalan .N Vs The Director of Pension

Kannan.T Vs The State of Tamil Nadu

Santha.M Vs The Chairman and Managing Director

Thavas Pandeeswari.P Vs The Secretary to Government

M.Malar Chelvan Vs The Managing Director

Ramar.S Vs The Principal Secretary to Government