Full Judgment
(Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records on the file of the 1st Respondent relating to impugned order issued in S.O.No.15/2015/E1 dated 28.09.2015 and quash the same and to direct the Respondents to retain the petitioner in the present post and place in accordance with the Transfer Policy of the Government.)
1. This Writ Petition has been filed by Murugadoss challenging the correctness of the impugned transfer order dated 28.09.2015 issued by the District Forest Officer, Thanjavur Division, Thanjavur, the first respondent herein in S.O.No.15/2015/E1 dated 28.09.2015, in and by which, the petitioner has been transferred from Kumbakonam to Thanjavur.
2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, taking support from G.O.Ms.No.10, Personnel and Administrative Reforms (S) Department, dated 07.01.1994, would submit that in the case of Junior Officials like Junior Assistants, Typist, Assistants, Drivers etc., transfer to a different station may generally be considered only if there is no other suitable post in the same station to accommodate them under these guidelines. While that is the General Transfer Policy, that has to be applied once in three years, but, the petitioner has been disturbed by transfer from Kumbakonam to Thanjavur within 1-1/2 years, that too without mentioning the reasons whatsoever including the administrative reason, therefore, the impugned order has to go. Adding further, he would submit that as the petitioner has been disturbed during the middle of the academic year, the impugned order has to go. Therefore, if the impugned transfer order is not set aside, the petitioner will be exposed to serious hardships. Adding further, he would submit that since the impugned transfer order is violation of transfer policy of the Government, the petition challenging the impugned transfer order is deserved to be allowed.
3. Refuting the above submission, the learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents would submit that it is not open to the petitioner to challenge the impugned transfer order posting the petitioner at Thanjavur from Kumbakonam, since it is just way 40 k.m. Secondly, the impugned transfer order has been passed on administrative reason and the same has also been mentioned in the impugned order, therefore, it is not open to the petitioner to say that it is in violation of the transfer policy.
4. This Court finds merits in the submission made by the learned Government Advocate, the reason is, when the petitioner is transferred from Kumbakonam to Thanjavur, which is just way i.e., 40 k.m., the question of disturbing the petitioner within a period of three years as per G.O.Ms.No.10, Personnel and Administrative Reforms (S) Department, dated 07.01.1994 is totally far from acceptance. Secondly, it is a well settled legal position that transfer is not only an incident of service, but also a condition of service. Therefore, the employer, who has passed the impugned transfer order, will be best known who should be transferred to where.Hence, this Court is not inclined to entertain this Writ Petition. Accordingly, the Writ Petition fails and the same is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions are also dismissed.