Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2015 DIGILAW 3105 (ALL)

Anil Kumar Verma v. State of U. P.

2015-09-30

ANIL KUMAR

body2015
JUDGMENT Anil Kumar, J. 1. Heard Sri Rajendra Nath, learned counsel petitioner, learned State counsel and perused the record. By means of the present writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the impugned order of transfer dated 19.9.2015 passed by respondent No. 2/Commissioner, U.P. Excise Head Office, Allahabad by which he has been transferred from the post of Constable Lucknow to Unnao. 2. Learned counsel for petitioner while challenging the impugned order of transfer submits that the same is contrary to the Clause 1(Ghha) of the transfer policy dated 9.4.2015, as such the same is liable to be set aside. 3. From the perusal of the Clause 1(d) of the Government Order dated 9.4.2015, the position which emerged out is that the husband and wife, if they are in Government service, they may be posted at the same place, as far as possible (Yathasambhav). 4. Phrase "as far as possible" mentioned in the transfer policy does not take away the right of the employer to transfer on an administrative exigency or even on administrative ground of its employee. Further, this phrase really means that the principles are to be observed unless it is not possible to follow them in the particular circumstances of a case. By use of this phraseology the rule etc. is made directory instead of mandatory (See Rani v. Deputy Director of Consolidation. AIR 1959 All 525 and Gopalpur Tea Co. Ltd. v. Corporation of Calcutta, AIR 1966 Cal 51 ). 5. The expression 'as far as possible' inheres in it an in built flexibility. (See Osmania University v. V.S. Muthurangam and others, AIR 1997 SC 2758 ). Accordingly, the expression "as far as practicable" mean, practicable, feasible, possible, performable. It means, not interfering with the ration prescribed under any rule, which fulfils the interest of administration, but flexible provision clothing Government with powers to meet special situations where the normal process of the Government resolution cannot flow smooth. (See N.K. Chauhan and others v. State of Gujarat and others, AIR 1977 SC 251 ). Therefore, as far as possible means, so long it remains practicable and feasible. It is a discretion of the authority to carve out an exception and it is not necessary for him to give strict adherence to the statutory provisions. 6. In this regard Apex Court in the case of Union of India and another v. N.P. Thomas, 1993 Supp (1) SCC 704. It is a discretion of the authority to carve out an exception and it is not necessary for him to give strict adherence to the statutory provisions. 6. In this regard Apex Court in the case of Union of India and another v. N.P. Thomas, 1993 Supp (1) SCC 704. Relevant portion of the paragraph No. 8 held as under: "The submissions of the respondent that some of his juniors are retained by Kerala Circle and that his transfer is against the policy of the Government posting the husband and wife in the same station as far as possible, cannot be countenanced since the respondent holding a transferable post has no vested right to remain in the Kerala Circle itself and cannot claim, as a matter of right, the posting in that circle even on promotion." 7. No other points have been argued or pressed by the learned counsel for the petitioner. 8. For the foregoing reasons, I do not find any infirmity or illegality in the impugned order which is under challenge in the present writ petition. In the result, the writ petition is dismissed.