(Smt.) Kanchan Mondal vs LT. Governor and Others

Sanjib Banerjee, J.—The writ petition is directed against the order of transfer of the petitioning junior engineer from Mayabunder to Rangat. The Petitioner says that she has been a victim of frequent transfers and that an old enmity between the Petitioner''s father and a former Adhyaksha of the North and Middle Andaman Zilla Parishad has resulted in the Petitioner''s plight.

The Petitioner says that the erstwhile Adhyaksha had taken steps against the Petitioner''s father and such person, despite not being in office any longer, wields considerable influence in the district to ensure that steps are taken to the detriment and prejudice of the Petitioner.

On behalf of the Respondent authorities it is submitted that the order of transfer dated April 19, 2010 was issued by the Chief Executive Officer of the Zilla Parishad and not by the erstwhile Adhyaksha. It is submitted that the concerned former Adhyaksha has no say in the affairs of the Zilla Parishad and an irrelevant issue has been raked up to with a view to give this unworthy petition seeking to resist transfer some element of credibility. The Respondents contend that the Petitioner''s was not a solitary case of transfer, but that several junior engineers in North and Middle Andaman had been transferred from one place within the district to another by the same administrative fiat.

An order of transfer made in the usual course is ordinarily not to be interfered with. The executive has to be given the functional freedom to choose the stations of engagement of its officers and employees which may be done for the purpose of administrative convenience. Though a charge of mala fides may be brought to undo an order of transfer, such charge has to have substantial weight. The presumption is always against the person seeking to resist transfer. The grounds furnished by the present Petitioner is that an old enmity between the Petitioner''s father and an erstwhile Adhyaksha of the Zilla Parishad has resulted in the Petitioner facing punitive action. Even if such allegations were true, more material in support thereof had to be furnished for the Petitioner to be entitled to unusual order stopping a transfer. A Government employee attempting to avoid an order of transfer has not only to raise a doubt as to the motives of the order, but also to establish the mala fides or crass arbitrariness. The Court will err on the side of the transfer.

The case that the Petitioner has carried to Court does not warrant any interference with the order dated April 19, 2010 transferring the Petitioner from Mayabunder to Rangat or rob the authorities of their functional freedom. The Petitioner says that she has already joined the post without prejudice to the Petitioner''s contention in the present proceedings. She has to rest content at her transferred post.

W.P. No. 8605 of 2010 is disposed of by only observing that the institution of the present writ petition should not be counted against the writ Petitioner or made the basis for any immediate transfer of the Petitioner.

There will be no order as to costs.

Urgent certified photocopies of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties subject to the compliance with all requisite formalities.