9911796707
TMI Blog1998 (8) TMI 450X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... spondents in the writ Appeals are not maintainable, as the appellant-company is not a State or other authority within the sweep of the expression used in Article 12 of the Constitution of India, and (2) the order of transfer passed by the appellant is in accordance with the terms and conditions of contract of service as well as Officers Service Rules and it is purely on account of exigencies of work and in the interest of business of the appellant-company and the said order of transfer passed is not vitiated by any mala fides and the same cannot be challenged by the respondents in the writ proceedings. But it is contended by the respondents in the Writ Petitions that Mysore Paper Mills which is a company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 ( the Act ) and which is a Government Company, as defined in section 617 of the Act falls within the meaning of the State , as defined in article 12 of the Constitution and the said company being the State within the meaning of article 12 of the Constitution is bound to act fairly and reasonably and, if it does not do so, its action can be struck down under article 14, as being arbitrary. It is further argued by the respondents tha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... acts narrated by the respondents in their writ petitions: The 2nd respondent in the Writ Appeals who is a post-graduate in Chemistry, joined the Mysore Paper Mills Ltd. ( the Mill ) as a Management Trainee on 10-8-1991 and was posted to look after D.M. Plant and thereafter, he was confirmed as Assistant Superintendent (Laboratory) in the Research and Development Division of the Mill as per the Official Memorandum 26-9-1983. Thereafter, he was promoted to the post of Deputy Supdt. (DM Plant) with effect from 14-8-1986 as per the official memorandum dated 6-12-1986. Subsequently he was further promoted as Senior Suptd. (D.M. Plant) with effect from 14-8-1989 as per the official Memorandum dated 7-9-1991 and the said post was later redesignated as Assistant Manager (D.M. Plant). He was transferred to the Regional Office, Calcutta by a memo bearing Reference No. FPA/TRF/97/381 dated 27-11-1997. The 2nd respondent alleged that the said transfer order is mala fide and illegal and it was issued with a view to victimise him and to prevent him from functioning as an Executive Member of the M.P.M. Officer s Association which was registered on 30-12-1986 under the provisions of the Indian ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ciation formed a joint front, and there was a joint struggle by the workers and the officers because of certain pressing demands and problems. Immediately thereafter the services of the 2nd respondents were termi- nated without holding an enquiry by an order dated 6-4-1990. Subse- quently, the order of termination was superseded by another order dated 2-7-1990 and the 1st respondent was kept under suspension as per the Official Memorandum dated 2-7-1990. Subsequently, the order of suspen- sion was revoked and the 2nd respondent was reinstated by the manage- ment of the Mill as per the Official Memorandum dated 22-12-1990. Thereafter, the 2nd respondent continued to work in DM Plant and he was not holding any post as an Office Bearer of the association between the 1991 and 1994. However, he was guiding the office bearers whenever his guidance was sought and he was advising the 1 st respondent-association in respect of fresh charter of demands and certain other matters in respect of which there were serious disputes between the association and the management of the Mill. According to the respondents during that period one Sri V.K. Gore, was the Chairman and Managing Director of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of transfer was issued with a mala fide intention and to see that the 2nd respondent stopped to do any kind of trade union activity, as the place to which he was posted was totally isolated and the Management also saw to it that the second petitioner did not come in contact with any one. The 2nd respondent challenged the said order of transfer before this Court in W.P. No. 31, 660 of 1994 and this Court ordered notice to the Management. Respondents also alleged that at that time the 2nd respondent s wife and Sri Gopinath s wife were assaulted by the security guard and they were humiliated in the absence of the 2nd respondent and Sri Gopinath, the then President of the Association. The 2nd respondent alleged to have sent a letter dated 20-12-1994, addressed to the Senior Manager (Task Force) of the Mill and his immediate superior under whom he was posted certified to the correctness of the facts mentioned in the representation. Subsequently the 2nd respondent was transferred from the Task Force Department to the Technical Training Centre as Assistant Manager, as per the order dated 14-3-1995 and he was simultaneously issued a Memo of Charges on 14-3-1995, alleging that he has cont ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Association. It is also alleged that the Chairman and the Managing Director by a letter dated 27-1-1998, enclosing a copy of the resolution of the Board directed the officers to disassociate themselves from the association. In the meantime, the leave applied by the 2nd Respondent was sanctioned as per letter dated 16-1-1998 and he was asked to appear before the Medical Board by an intimation dated 21-1-1998. Thereafter the 2nd Respondent also submitted a representation to the Management requesting for sanction of leave as per letter dated 7-2-1998. Thereafter he received a memo informing him that the sick leave applied for by him has been sanctioned on loss of pay up to 5-2-1998 and further he was sanc- tioned privilege leave for a period of 30 days from 6-2-1998 till 7-3-1998 and he was asked to appear before the NIMHANS, Bangalore for further treatment. In the meantime, the 1st Respondent Association received a letter dated 5-2-1998 from the management informing that the fundamen- tal rights are subject to reasonable restrictions imposed by the State and the advise of the management to disband the association was within the powers of the management and further threatened that the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... instrumentality or agency of the Government and that would have to be decided on a proper assessment of the facts in the light of the relevant factors. The concept of instrumentality or agency of the Government is not limited to a corporation created by a statute but is equally applicable to a company or society and in a given case it would have to be decided, on a consideration of the relevant factors. Whether the company or society is an instrumentality or agency of the Government so as to come within the meaning of the expression authority in Article 12. A juristic entity which may be State for the purpose of Parts III and IV would not be so for the purpose of Part XIV or any other provision of the Constitution. (Case law discussed)" (p. 487) In Para 9 of the same decision it is held: "The tests for determining as to when a corporation can be said to be an instrumentality or agency of Government may now be called out from the judgment in the International Airport Authority s case (AIR 1979 SC 1628). These tests are not conclusive or clinching, but they are merely indicative indicia which have to be used with care and caution, because while stressing the necessity of a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... financial resources of the State being the chief funding source, ( ii ) functional character being governmental in essence, ( iii ) plenary control residing in Government, ( iv ) prior history of the same activity having been carried on by Government and made over to the new body, and ( v ) some element of authority or command. Whether the legal person is a corporation created by a statute, as distinguished from under a statute, is not an important criterion although it may be an indicium..." (p. 212) In another decision rendered in Manmohan Singh v. Commissioner, Union Territory AIR 1985 SC 364, it was held: "(C) Punjab Aided Schools (Security of Service) Act (19 of 1969) as extended to Union Territory of Chandigarh, S.3-Aided School receiving grant upto 95 per cent of its expenditure - Teachers receiving protection under the Act - School subject to regulations made by Education Department - It is other authority within Article 12 of Constitution and amenable to writ jurisdiction of High Court. Civil Writ No. 1086 of 1983, D/24-2-1983, (Punj. Har.), Reversed. (Constitution of India, Arts. 226 and 12. Other authority - Aided School)." (p. 365) In a latest decision of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n or bye-laws or articles of association. (11)The instrumentality, agency or person renders an element of public service and is accountable to health and strength of the workers, men and women, adequate means of livelihood, the security for payment of living wages, reasonable conditions of work, decent standard of life and opportunity to enjoy full leisure and social and cultural activities to the workmen. (12)Every action of the public authority, agency or instrumentality or the person acting in public interest or any act that gives rise to public element should be guided by public interest in exercise of public power or action hedged with public element and is open to challenge. It must meet the test of reasonableness, fairness and justness. (13)If the exercise of the power is arbitrary, unjust and unfair, the public authority, instrumentality, agency or the person acting in public interest, though in the field of private law, is not free to prescribe any unconstitutional conditions or limitations in their actions. It must be based on some rational and relevant principles. It must not be guided by irrational or irrelevant considerations and all their actions should satisf ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of control over the management and policies of the body, and rendering of an important public service being the obligatory functions of the State may largely point out that the body is State . If the Government operates behind a corporate veil, carrying out governmental activity and governmental functions of vital public importance, there may be little difficulty in identifying the body as State within the meaning of Article, 12 of the Constitution." The learned Counsel for the Respondents has relied upon a decision of our High Court rendered in K.V. Panduranga Rao v. Karnataka Dairy Deve- lopment Corpn. 1994 (1) Kar. L.J. 149 wherein it is held that the Karnataka Dairy Development Corporation Ltd. is an agent and instrumentality of the State, applying the tests laid down in the above decisions of the Supreme Court. 7. On the basis of the above tests laid down by the Supreme Court in the above decisions, we must now proceed to examine whether the appellant- company in the present case is an authority falling within the definition of State under article 12 and whether it is an instrumentality or agency of the Government? The answer must obviously be in the affirmative ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y other articles or things of a character similar or analogous to the foregoing or any of them or connected therewith. 3. To purchase, sell, import, export or carry on the business of manufacturers of dyestuff, tanning and bleaching materials, organic and inorganic chemicals, inclusive of sulphuric acid, hydrochloric acid, drugs, glue, resin, cellulose, spirits, turpentine, soap, all salts and carbonates, oil, chlorate, lime, caustic soda, clay and other materials and substances used in the manufacture or treatment of paper, board and pulp and sugar. 4. To develop the resources of and turn to account any lands and any rights over or connected with the land belonging to or in which the Company is interested, in particular by clearing, draining, fencing, planting, cultivating, building, improving, farming, irrigating, grazing and by promoting immigration and emigration and the establishment of villages and settlements. 4A. To promote/establish joint ventures, ancillary units and provide technical know-how/collaboration and advice, whether in India or outside relating to manufacture, distribution of paper, sugar or any other articles, products or things of a character of similar ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... seminars likely to advance those objects or for giving merit awards, scholarships, loans or any other assistance to deserving students or other scholars or persons to enable them to prosecute their studies in academic pursuits or researches and for establishing, conducting or assisting any institutions, fund, etc., having any one of the aforesaid objects as one of its objects, by giving donations or otherwise in any other manner and the Directors may at their discretion in order to implement any of the abovementioned objects or purposes transfer without consideration or at such fair or concessional value as the Directors may think fit and divest the ownership of any property of the Company to or in favour of any public institution or Trust recognised or approved by the Central or State Government or any authority specified in that behalf by such Government or established under any law for the time being in force as the Directors may approve." 9. Thus it is seen from the above objects that one of the objects of the said Government Company is to carry on business of manufacture of news printing papers which is the monopoly of the State, since no other company is allowed to produ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... board of directors shall be the Managing Director. According to article 93, the number of directors to whom the manage- ment of the Mill is entrusted shall not be more than 12 and should not be less than 9 inclusive of our directors to be nominated by the Government of Karnataka including directors nominated by the financial institutions under Article 94A of the Articles of association, which are referred as Industrial Development Bank of India, Industrial Finance Corpn. of India. The Industrial Credit and Investment Corpn. of India Ltd., Life Insurance Corpn. of India, Unit Trust of India and General Insurance Corpn. or any other Finance Corpn. or any Financing Corpn. or Credit Corpn. or any other Financing Company or body to whom M.P.M. owes moneys. It is also made clear in article 94A that the board of directors of the company shall have no power to remove from office the Nominee Directors and they shall hold the said office only so long as moneys remain owing by the company to the Corpn. and aforesaid financial units or so long as the said units and Corpn. holds Debentures in the company as a result of direct subscription or private placement etc. 11. The appellant-company ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion is applicable to recruitments in the appellant-company. Employees working in the appellant-company are permitted to go on deputation to other Government Departments and vice versa. All foreign tours of officers are to be approved by Government of Karnataka. All loans taken by MPM are guaranteed by Government of Karnataka. 12. Thus from all these facts it is found that the appellant-company is totally controlled by the Government of Karnataka which is a clear indication that the appellant-company is an instrumentality of the State. Respondents produced a true copy of the letter dated 1-8-1985 of the Secretary of the Government of Karnataka addressed to the Chairman and Managing Director of the company conveying approval for the continuance of Prof. YML Sharma, Sri J.S. Matharu and Sri R.M. Mehta, as directors on the board of directors of the company. He also produced ( i ) another letter dated 8-9-1992 marked as Annexure - JJJ from Under Secretary to Government, Commerce Industries Department, Govern- ment of Karnataka, addressed to the Chairman and Managing Director of the Mill conveying approval of the Government to re-elect Shri N. Ravindranathan, Sri S.K. Warrier and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Karnataka regarding appointment of competent Officers under Karnataka Public Premises Act. ( xv ) Annexure-ZZZ - Letter dated 27-7-1995 from the Government directing MPM to strictly follow the Roaster system for recruit- ments. ( xvi ) Annexure-AAAA - Letter dated 7-12-1994 from KSBPE to MPM stating that payment of DA should have the approval of Govern- ment of Karnataka." The contents of the above documents clearly go to show that the entire company is run as part of the State Government and even the schemes of the company are to be approved by the Government. It is also found from the above correspondences that there is total financial control over the company by the Government of Karnataka. The detailed instructions are given by the Government indicating how the directors of the Government have to function. The Government of Karnataka has notified premises of the company at Bhadravathi at Public Premises under the provisions of Karnataka Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1974 and appointed 5 officers of the company as competent officers for the purpose of the Act and all the top officers of the Mills are appointed with the approval of the Governme ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Department, Government of India on every year. Thus the appellant-company has got the characteristics of a Department of Government of Karnataka and the Mill is protected, constituted, started and controlled by the Government of Karnataka. The Company Secretary of the appellant in his communication dated 28-1-1992 at Annexure-GGG has clearly stated that the appellant- company is an undertaking under the control of the Government of Karnataka." 14. Thus all the important tests laid down by the Hon ble Supreme Court in the above decisions to determine whether Corpn. Government compa- ny or any other institution is a State or other authority or instrumentality of the Government are satisfied in respect of appellant-company. So we have no hesitation to hold that the appellant is State within the meaning of expression used in article 12 of the Constitution. On similar facts in a decision rendered in Association of Officers G.S.F.C. v. Gujarat State Fertilizers Co. 1985. LLJ 238 at Page 239, it was held that: "Gujarat State Fertilizer Company Ltd., is a State within the meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution of India because more than 80 per cent of the shareholding ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ld that the Mysore Paper Mills is a State within the meaning of article 12 of the Constitution. 16. In another decision of this Court rendered in T.G. Srinivasa Murthy v. Bharat Earth Movers Ltd. 1982 (1) LLJ 268, it was held that: "... ( i ) The Bharat Earth Movers Ltd., ( ii ) the Hindusthan Machine Tools Ltd., and ( iii ) the Karnataka Agro Industries Corporation Limited which are companies incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 and are Government Companies defined in section 617 of the Companies Act, fall within the meaning of word State , as defined in Article 12 of the Constitution of India." (p. 271) In para 8 of the said decision it is observed that: "(1) It is not disputed, that in the case of each of the respondent-com- panies the whole or substantial part of the share capital is held by the Central Government and/or the State Government, as the case may be. It is also not disputed that each one of the respondent-companies is a Government Company as defined in section 617 of the Companies Act and they are all public sector undertakings established by the respective Governments and that the concerned Government exercises full and effective control ov ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r rural development and to permit social and economic welfare of the people in rural areas by undertaking programmes and to assist in activities for the promotion and growth of the national economy, for discharging what the directors may consider to be social and moral responsibility of the company to the public or any section of the people which is clearly related to Governmental function and the company enjoys monopoly status which is State conferred. In essence the Government operates behind a corporate veil carrying out Governmental activity and Governmental functions of vital public importance. In the changed set up of the constitution of board of directors, investment, mode of functioning of the Mysore Paper Mills Co. and the new objectives undertaken by it, we hold that the view taken by this Court in the earlier decisions rendered in the Writ Petitions W.P. 27375 of 1992, W.P. 8746 of 1991 W.P. 16861 of 1989, W.P. 16504 of 1995, Writ Appeal Nos. 87 88 of 1992 WA 1445 of 1984 that the Mysore Paper Mills was not State is no longer good law. 19. Further the learned Counsel for the respondents contended that even if the appellant-company does not fall within the express ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... duty imposed on the body judged in the light of the positive obligation owed by the person or the authority to the person affected. If a positive obligation exists, a mandamus cannot be denied. Mandamus is a very wide remedy, which could be easily available to reach injustice wherever it is found." But, as rightly pointed out by the learned Counsel for the appellant, if rights sought to be enforced are purely of a private character, no mandamus can be issued. The nature of duty imposed on the body must be judged in the light of positive obligations owed by the person or authority to the affected party and there must be an element of public duty before mandamus can be issued. Since it is found that the appellant-company is a State within the meaning of article 12 of the Constitution, it is unnecessary to go into the question whether the relief sought for by the respondents can be granted under article 226 without reference to the provisions of article 12. 20. Point No. 2: As it is found that the Writ Petitions are maintainable, we will now proceed to consider the merits of the contention raised by the respondents that the order of transfer Annexure-EE passed by the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hnical Training Centre, the Writ Petition No. 31660 of 1994, filed by him was permitted to be withdrawn by keeping open all the contentions urged therein. It is also pointed out by the Respondents that subsequently on 12-6-1996, Respon- dent No. 2, was promoted as Deputy Manager (Technical Training Centre) with effect from 14-8-1994 and on 7-8-1996, the charge-sheet dated 14-3-1995 issued against him was dropped by the management of the company. 21. According to the Respondents, the appellant has taken all the above steps against the 2nd Respondent, since he was responsible for forming the Officers Association which was registered on 30-12-1996 under the provisions of the Indian Trade Unions Act, in which he became the founder Secretary and was actively participating in the activities of the association as an office bearer by submitting Charter of demands for revision of pay-scales, revision of dearness allowance, revision of H.R.A. and several other allowances and revision of service rules etc. It is also their case that inspite of award of the Addl. Industrial Tribunal in favour of the Officers, the same has not been enforced and a representation given by the 1st Respondent ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d any personal griev- ance or prejudice against the 2nd respondent. 22. Thus, it is clear that all the above chronological events which took place prior to the date of transfer order Annexure-EE issued against the 2nd Respondent have no direct bearing or connection with the said action taken by the management against the 2nd respondent. Further, the contention of 2nd respondent that after 1994, he was guiding the office bearers of the 1st respondent-association whenever guidance was sought from him and he was advising them in respect of fresh charter of demands and certain other matters in respect of which serious dispute was there between the association and the management of the Mills is not supported by any prima facie documentary evidence. Similarly, the allegation made by him in Para 4 of his Writ Petition that during this period Sri V.K. Gore, who was the Chairman and Managing Director of the Mills became very hostile towards the office bearers of the association and also towards the active functionaries of the association and on account of it a show-cause notice was issued to him during April 1994 making frivolous charges against him is also not based on any material p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... espondents which took place after the date of the transfer order, they cannot be taken into consideration to decide the question whether the action taken by the appellant in issuing the transfer order to the 2nd respondent is vitiated by mala fides and arbitrariness. The respondents referred to a letter dated 12-1-1998 addressed to the President of the association asking them to disband the association as per the decision taken by the board of directors in their meeting held which is marked as Annexure-SS. It is also the case of the respondents that thereafter the said communication was sent individually to all the Officers including the 2nd respondent. The respon- dents have also referred to a letter dated 24-4-1998 addressed to the President of the Association Annexure-R-23 informing that the board of directors of the company in its meeting held on 6-1-1998, has desired to advise them to disband the MPM Officers Association and therefore, they are advised to vacate the side rooms in the Guest House Complex presently used as office of the association with furniture and fittings provided by the company and to hand over possession of the same to the Deputy Manager (PR), Bhadravat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed Counsels, since these are subsequent developments which have no direct bearing on the question. Whether the action taken by the management in transferring the 2nd respondent to Regional Office, Calcutta, is a mala fide action. 26. The respondents have also referred to one more subsequent incident which took place on the intervening night of 5 / 6-5-1998, setting fire to the household articles inside the quarters occupied by Respondent No. 2 by breaking open the doors during his absence when he had gone to Mangalore. On receiving the said information, 2nd respondent lodged a complaint with the police copy of which is produced as Annexure-R 19. In this complaint 2nd respondent has shown the appellant Sri. S.L. Gangadharappa, Chairman and Managing Director of the company, as the suspect, who must have been behind the entire incident and must have got it done with the help of some assistants with an intention to intimidate him and his family and to cause material damage to him out of personal hatred. On the basis of the said complaint, a case is registered in Paper Town Police Station, Bhadravathi. In Crime No. 30 of 1998 copy of which is Annexure-R20, in which he alleged that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he appellant, who is the head of the organisation which cannot be expected to be tolerated by the management. Further on the basis of the said subsequent incident, no inference can be drawn that the earlier order of transfer issued against the 2nd respondent by the management on 27-11-1997, is vitiated by mala fides. 28. It is next contended by the learned Counsel for the respondents that each of the above referred instances cannot be considered in isolation and if the totality of the circumstances are taken into consideration, it would be apparent that issue of transfer order is a clear instance of mala fide and arbitrary action taken on extraneous considerations with the sole object of victimising the 2nd respondent and forcing the other Office Bearers of the association to disband the association. But we are unable to find any merit in the above contention, as it is found that the management has not taken any vindictive action against the 2nd respondent at any time prior to the date of passing the abovesaid transfer order and even, they promoted him twice and dropped the proceedings initiated against him accepting the undertaking given by him that he will not associate h ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... early indicates that it is a mala fide action taken by the management against him with a view to victimise him. But this argument is repelled by the appellant by narrating his objections that, since 2nd respondent is a technically qualified person having expertise knowledge of the manufacturing of the paper and paper products which are final products of the appellant-company he is transferred to Calcutta Regional Office to attend to the complaints which are being received from the customers regarding defects in the quality of paper and to give day to day feed back from the consumers on quality and other aspects so that corrective steps could be taken at the earliest point of time and convince the consumers situated in the eastern region about the quality of their product and accordingly increase the sales. It is also submitted by the appellant that the 2nd respondent had the benefit of exposures to training in various aspects of management principles, quality, employee-employer relations, customers relations, effective communication and co-ordina- tion etc. and it is for this reason it has decided to transfer the services of the 2nd respondent to Calcutta Regional Office and the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cepted, as it is one of the terms and conditions of the appointment order issued to the 2nd respondent that he is liable to be transferred to any place and is there is also a service regulation also in this regard. Further the inconvenience that may be caused to the 2nd respondent by the said transfer is not a factor which can be taken into consideration under any of the service regulations, before passing the transfer order in respect of an employee. In a decision in Union of India v. S.L. Abbas of the Supreme Court reported in 1993-(II) LLJ 626 it is held that: "An order of transfer is an incidence of Government service. Under the fundamental Rules, Government servant is liable to transfer anywhere in India. The executive instructions regarding transfer issued by the Government are in the nature of guidelines. They do not have statutory force, who should be transferred, where, is a matter for the appropriate authority to decide. Unless the order of transfer is vitiated by mala fides or is made in violation of any statutory provision, the Court cannot interfere with it." (p. 626) In view of the above law laid down by the Supreme Court, it is not open to the respondents t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to be considered as an act of victimisation, cannot be accepted. In another decision of the Supreme Court rendered in Punjab v. Joginder Singh Dhatt 1993 AIR SCW 3167 (3168), it is held that: "Transfer - Order passed purely on administrative grounds - In ordinary course and to prevent transferee from interfering with enquiry - Order not causing any injustice - Not liable to be set aside in writ jurisdiction." In another decision in State of Madhya Pradesh v. S.S. Kourav AIR 1995 SC 1056, it was held that: "The Courts or Tribunals are not appellant forums to decide on transfers of officers on administrative grounds. The wheels of administration should be allowed to run smoothly and the Courts or Tribunals are not expected to interdict the working of the administrative system by transferring the officers to proper places. It is for the administration to take appropriate decision and such decisions shall stand unless they are vitiated either by mala fides or by extraneous consideration without any factual background foundation. When as in this case, the transfer order is issued on administrative grounds the Court cannot go into the expediency of posting an officer at ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
