Shanti Kumari vs Regional Deputy Director, Health Services, Patna Division, Patna And Others
- SCC(1981) 2 SCC 72
- AIRAIR 1981 SC 1577
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
Transfer of a government servant is a matter of administrative discretion based on exigencies of service or administrative reasons, and courts cannot interfere with such transfers, even when challenged in writ jurisdiction. If a government servant alleges that a transfer order breaches specific government instructions applicable to transfers in their department, the administrative authorities are duty-bound to examine the matter and provide redress where the allegation is substantiated, rather than the court undertaking such review.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
1. This appeal by special leave is directed against an order of the Patna High Court dated February 4, 1980 dismissing the writ petition filed by the appellant, who was posted as Auxiliary Nurse Mid-Wife at Bowstead Zanana Hospital at Barh, in limine by which she had challenged the impugned order of the Regional Deputy Director of Health Services, Patna Division, Patna dated January 13, 1979 transferring her from Barh to the Urban Family Welfare center of the Sub-Divisional Hospital, Danapur. The High Court, however, while declining to interfere, directed the appellant to file a representation to the State Government for her transfer to a place in her home district, except Barh and that if such representation was filed, it should be considered by the State Government.
2. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, we are of the opinion that the High Court rightly declined to interfere with the impugned order. Transfer of a Government servant may be due to exigencies of service or due to administrative reason. The Courts cannot interfere in such matters. Shri Grover, learned Counsel for the appellant, however, contends that the impugned order was in breach of the Government instructions with regard to transfers in the Health Department. If that be so, the authorities will look into the matter and redress the grievance of the appellant.
3. Shri Goburdhan, appearing on behalf of the respondents, makes a statement that he would recommend to the State Government that the appellant should be posted as an Auxiliary Nurse Mid-Wife in her home district, except Barh. We hope and trust that the State Government will sympathetically deal with the representation made by the appellant in the matter of her transfer and will act according to the advice of their counsel.
4. We understand that the appellant by virtue of the ad interim order dated November 25, 1980 is still continuing in her present post at Barh. She may be allowed to continue in that post until she is given the posting order.
5. Subject to these observations, the appeal fails and is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs.
This page reproduces a public judgment and a summary of it. It is research material, not legal advice, and it is no substitute for advice from an advocate on your own facts.
Research this judgment with Miss Lucy
Ask what it holds, what has followed it, and what it means for your matter — in plain English, with the citations.
Try Miss Lucy free