Srinagar, May 12: The Central Administrative Tribunal has held that it is the exclusive domain of an employer to determine at what place and for how long period the services of a particular employee are required, even as it said that the transfer of an employee cannot be carried out for extraneous considerations or under political pressure.
A division bench comprising M S Latif (Judicial Member) and Prasant Kumar (Administrative Member) held that transfer of an employee has to be effected in public interest and not at the mercy of politicians and they cannot be made subservient to them.
The Court said this while dealing with a plea by one Muhammad Rafiq Lali, a Lecturer in Education Department, presently deployed as warden in Gujjar & Bakerwal Boys Hostel, Srinagar.
Lali was aggrieved by the order dated 17-03-2025 by which he was recalled with the direction to report to his original place of posting with immediate effect. His contention was that the order asking him to report to his original place of posting was the outcome of a D O letter issued by an MLA in favour of Altaf Hussain Bajad, a Master in a Girls High School, who he said had already completed his deputation term as Warden, Gujjar & Bakerwal Hostel, Srinagar, in an earlier spell.
Lali said there was no scope for the competent authority to have issued the order as he was yet to complete his term of deputation.
After hearing, court noted that the record, as was ordered to be produced, prima facie, made it clear that the MLA had flashed a D.O letter to the Minister strongly recommending the case of Bajad for his posting in Gujjar & Bakerwal Boys Hostel, Srinagar, as Warden.
The Court observed that the transfer had neither been made in the administrative exigency nor in public interest. We need to strongly emphasize that the government servants are not at the mercy of politicians and they cannot be made subservient to them.
Lali also contended that the Government has issued a policy for deputing of wardens, Assistant Wardens, Tutors in various hostels vide order bearing No. 557-JK(GAD) dated May 9, 2023, wherein he has referred to the term of deputation which shall be for a maximum period of three years only and, on the expiry of which, an official shall be deemed to have been relieved to his or her parent department but the respondents have violated their own Government policy of deputation.
The order impugned bearing No. 237-JK(EDU) of 2025 dated 17-03-2025, being violative of Government order No. 557JK(GAD) of 2023 dated 09-05-2023 and the impugned order having been issued merely on the basis of recommendations made by the MLA, in the facts and circumstances of the case, it cannot countenance and sustain in the eyes of law, The impugned order is, accordingly, quashed and set aside”, the tribunal said.
However, the tribunal asked Lali to move a detailed representation before the competent authority to project all his grievances before it and directed the competent authority, after according the opportunity of being heard to him to pass a fresh order within a period of 15 days positively strictly keeping in view the administrative and public exigency.
For the period of 15 days stipulated the petitioner shall be allowed to continue at his place of posting and it shall be the sole responsibility of the competent authority to dispose of the representation of the petitioner within the aforesaid period by passing a speaking order afresh in accordance with law.
|