The High Court dismissed a writ petition filed by a constable challenging an order transferring him to a different location without assigning reasons. The judge held that transfer is an exigency of service and does not require reasons unless done on administrative grounds.
The writ petition is dismissed in limine. No order as to costs.
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.
WPSS No.409 of 2014 Hon’ble Sudhanshu Dhulia, J.
Mr. Ajay Veer Pundir, Advocate, present for the petitioner.
Mr. N.P. Shah, learned Standing Counsel, present for the State/respondent nos. 1 to 5.
The petitioner is a constable in Civil Police, Uttarakhand. By means of the present writ petition, he has challenged his transfer order dated 12.02.2014.
The only ground for challenge of the transfer order is that no reason has been assigned in the transfer order.
Transfer is an exigency of service. No reason needs to be assigned in case of a transfer. The reasons are only needed to be assigned if transfer is done on administrative grounds. As per the Full Bench decision of this Court in the case of Smt. Damyanti Bisht Vs. State of Uttarakhand & others , 2008 (2) U.D. 517, only in such a case reasons have been assigned. There is no anomaly in the transfer order, as it is not on administrative grounds. On being asked from the learned counsel for the petitioner since how long petitioner is serving at Dehradun, he failed to give any reply.
In view of the above, no interference is called for in the present matter.
The writ petition is dismissed in limine. No order as to costs.
(Sudhanshu Dhulia, J.) 25.03.2014
ML
2 issues framed by the court
Whether a transfer order without reasons is maintainable when the transfer is not on administrative grounds?
Whether a transfer order served on a police constable can be challenged under Article 226 in the absence of reasons?
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Smt. Damyanti Bisht Vs. State of Uttarakhand & othersDistinguished¶6
Smt. Damyanti Bisht Vs. State of Uttarakhand & others, 2008 (2) U.D. 517
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Constable in Civil Police, Uttarakhand
State of Uttarakhand
Sudhanshu Dhulia
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
