Research › Search › Judgment

J&K High Court · body

2013 DIGILAW 581 (JK)

Ab. Rehman v. State Of J&K

2013-09-24

Mansoor Ahmad Mir

body2013
1. The petitioner has called in question transfer order bearing No. 175 of 2013 dated 06.06.2013, whereby he came to be transferred from Fire and Emergency Station, Leh to Fire and Emergency Station, Ganderbal, on the grounds taken in the memo of writ petition. 2. The official respondents have filed the detailed reply and resisted the writ petition on the averments made therein and have prayed that the ad interim direction granted by this Court may be vacated and the writ petition be dismissed. The positive case of the official respondents is that the petitioner has all along being posted in hometown and has avoided transfer from Leh/ Kargil. It is further averred that the private respondent, who has been transferred in petitioner's place and who, incidentally, is from Leh, is suffering from some ailment and was operated upon on 05.05.2013, therefore, was transferred to Leh on medical grounds. It is specifically averred in the reply that the petitioner has remained posted outside his hometown only for four months during his service tenure of nineteen years. It is further pleaded that the instant transfer has been made in the exigency of service. 3. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and considered the matter. The petitioner has failed to rebut the specific averments made in the reply by the respondents. On the contrary, the petitioner has failed to make out any ground, muchless a plausible ground to warrant quashing of the impugned transfer order. Therefore, I am of the considered view that the transfer order has been passed as per the exigency of service and no mala fides can be attributed thereto. 4. It needs to be kept in mind that the transfer of Government servants is an exigency of service and is made either in the interest of administration or public interest by the competent authority. The competent authorities are the best judge to decide which Government servant has to be posted where. This Court, in its extra ordinary jurisdiction, would be loath to assume to itself the powers vested or conferred on the concerned / competent authorities and to direct that a particular person be posted at a particular station. A Government servant does not have the choice, right or privilege to decide his/her place of posting. Consequently, the petitioner, being a Government servant, cannot seek his posting at a place of his liking. A Government servant does not have the choice, right or privilege to decide his/her place of posting. Consequently, the petitioner, being a Government servant, cannot seek his posting at a place of his liking. Therefore, no right of the petitioner has been impinged upon, nor does he have a right to ask for continuance at a particular place of posting. 5. In view of what has been said hereinabove, no case for admission is made out. Consequently, the impugned transfer order needs no interference. Writ petition is dismissed along with CMP. As a corollary, ad interim direction passed by this Court is vacated.