Ram Bharat Verma vs State of U.P. and Others

Pradeep Kant and Devi Prasad Singh, JJ.—Notice on behalf of opposite parties No. 1 to 3 has been accepted by learned Chief Standing Counsel.

Under challenge is the order passed by the learned Single Judge dated 30.7.2007 disposing the, writ petition of the appellant challenging his order of transfer by only issuing a direction to make representation, which may be decided by the authority competent.

The appellant''s grievance is that he was transferred on compassionate ground because of the serious illness of his wife vide order dated 19.6.2007 to Ambedkar Nagar where he had taken charge on 2.7.2007. The appellant has again been transferred on 6.7.2007 from Faizabad to Dudhwa National Park District Lakhimpur Kheri.

It is the case of the State that in pursuance of the decision taken by High Level Committee to get back those employees who were earlier working in Dudhwa National Park because of the fact that few tigers had died for which, such an exercise was necessary as a result of which, a large number of staff has been posted at Dudhwa National Park who had worked earlier.

Learned Single Judge taking it to be a policy decision taken by the High Level Committee found it proper, not to interfere with the order of transfer as this order was also said to have been passed because of the said decision of the High Level Committee.

Transfer orders on compassionate grounds can be passed, is not at all in dispute by the respondents as even in the usual transfer guidelines, the State has the power to accommodate persons at a place of their choice, if legally or otherwise not prohibited, at the discretion of the Government looking to their prayer for such transfer/posting on compassionate grounds. It is the obligation of the State Government that when such a request for compassionate transfer or posting is made by the Government servant to consider the plea and if necessary to make such enquiry which may be necessary for the purpose and if satisfied about the genuine claim of the Government servant to pass an order, accommodating him at the place where he has desired to be posted. It is also open to the State Government that if the plea of compassionate appointment does not stand substantiated, to reject the said prayer but in case the State Government once feels satisfied for such transfer it ought not change the place of posting of such an employee who has been posted at particular place on compassionate ground, soon thereafter or very frequently, even, if the policy for the time being is changed or a decision is taken to-transfer large number of employees, unless of course, there are some exceptional circumstances, which would not allow, the employee to remain any longer, at his choice posting.

Learned Counsel has placed reliance on the judgment of this Court passed by one of us sitting singly in Wasif Akhtar v. State of U.P. and Ors. 2001 (19) LCD 1275, wherein the Court has held that once an order of transfer is passed for personal reasons on compassionate grounds to a particular place then unless there are very strong and exceptional reasons for accommodating another person, such order be not cancelled.

Transfer on compassionate ground usually has to be seen slightly different from usual transfer and routine case transfer. It is true that once an order of transfer has been passed on compassionate ground it will not give any right in perpetuity to the-said Government servant, to remain on a particular place but there must be at least some reasonable time for him to stay at the place where he was posted and thereafter, only if there are compelling circumstances so require, the Government servant can be transferred to any other place.

Here in the instant case on compassionate ground the petitioner has been transferred only on 19.6:2007 in pursuance of which he had joined the transferred place on 2.7.2007 but in a decision taken to the effect that all the employees who were working earlier in Dudhwa National Park be posted there he has also been transferred to that place. We find that the order appears to have been passed without considering the plea that he was transferred on compassionate grounds. We, therefore, set aside the order dated 30.7.2007 passed by learned Single Judge, and quash the order of transfer dated 6.7.2007., Appellant shall be allowed to remain at the present place of posting at least for a period of one year and thereafter, as the case may be, and if his transfer required, in exigencies of services, the same be considered, but not without taking into account, that the petitioner has been posted at the present place, on compassionate ground.

Special appeal is allowed. Costs easy.