Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2012 DIGILAW 51 (RAJ)

E. K. Murlidharan v. Hindustan Copper Ltd.

2012-01-04

GOPAL KRISHAN VYAS

body2012
JUDGMENT 1. - This writ petition has come up today on application filed under Article 226(3), Constitution of India. With the consent of the parties, however, the matter is finally heard. 2. This writ petition has been filed by the employee of the respondent company who is discharging the duties in substantive capacity on the post of Chargeman (Mechanical) in Civil Department against order of intra transfer dated 22.8.2011 and prayed that same may he quashed and set aside and further the respondents may be directed to allow the petitioner to discharge the duties at the place where the petitioner was working prior to passing the order dated 22.8.2011. 3. The main grievance of the petitioner is that transfer order is in contravention of the circular dated 10.8.201 1 (Annex.8) issued by the Senior Manager (Human Resources) of the respondent company. in which, it is specifically provided that employees will furnish option who are working as Chargeman or Turner for working in the mines and, further, a specific condition was imposed that after receiving option forms, transfer order will be issued according to sequence and in absence of receiving any option form the transfer order would be made according to seniority and junior most person will be transferred. 4. The case of the petitioner is that no option was submitted by him for transfer but while retaining his junior person Taranjeet Singh the Senior Manager issued the transfer order which is totally in contravention of the circular dated 10.08.2011 (Annex.8), therefore, the transfer order dated 22.8.2011 may be quashed. 5. Per contra, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents submits that vide the impugned order, the petitioner was transferred in the same premises of Khetri Copper Complex purely on temporary basis due to administrative exigency. Impugned transfer does not suffer from any illegality because the employer has every right to post the employee as per administrative exigency and need. Here, in this case, the petitioner who is working on the post of Chargeman (Mechanical) on Acid & Fertilizer plant has been transferred purely on temporary basis on administrative ground, therefore, the petitioner cannot claim posting as a matter of right at the place where he was working prior to passing the order impugned. It is also pointed out that circular Annex.8 was issued by the Senior Manager for the purpose of administration. It is also pointed out that circular Annex.8 was issued by the Senior Manager for the purpose of administration. It has no statutory force for which the jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is required to be exercised, therefore, this writ petition may be dismissed with cost. 6. After hearing learned counsel for the parties, I have perused the notification (Annex.8) which is said to be issued by the Senior Manager (Human Resources) it appears that for convenience and smooth administration was issued by the Senior Manager which has no statutory force, so also, the petitioner who is working as Chargeman can be posted anywhere in the company as per need, therefore, in view of the judgment rendered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, reported in AIR 1993 SC 2486 and 2444, I am not inclined to interfere in this transfer matter because the circular dated 10.08.2011 is not statutory in nature. More so, it has been issued by the Senior Manager for smooth administration for which the petitioner cannot invoke the extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Otherwise also, transfer is incidence of service and, in this case, the petitioner has been transferred within the premises of the Khetri Copper Complex. On that basis also, no case is made out for interference in the order impugned. 7. Hence, this writ petition is dismissed. Ad interim stay order accordingly stands vacated.Petition dismissed. *******