Lohit v. Principal Secretary To Government, Department of Forest
2019-07-02
ARAVIND KUMAR, BELLUNKE A.S.
body2019
DigiLaw.ai
JUDGMENT : ARAVIND KUMAR, J. 1. This writ petition is directed against the order passed by Karnataka Administrative Tribunal, dated 04.06.2019 in application No.3156/2019, whereunder, challenge to the order of transfer dated 29.05.2019 (Annexure- A3) passed by respondent No.2 came to be negatived and application came to be dismissed. 2. Heard Sri. K.S. Korishettar, learned counsel appearing for petitioner and Smt. Veena Hegde, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for respondent Nos.1 to 4. Petitioner came to be transferred from his earlier place of posting by order dated 31.07.2013 to the present place namely office of Range Forest Officer, Golihalli Range, Khanapur Taluk and District Belagavi as Deputy Range Forest Officer. 3. On account of said order of transfer having been challenged by the incumbent who was the then occupying the said post the date of taking of charge by the petitioner got postponed till 28.06.2014 from the said date petitioner has been working till impugned order dated 29.05.2019 came be to be passed i.e., for a period of five years. 4. The grievance of the petitioner is that he is being office bearer of State Government Employee's Association, is entitled to be continued at the place of posting where he has been discharging his duties. As such, by relying upon the G.O. No.51/2017 dated 31.05.2019 he prays for setting aside the order passed by the Tribunal and prays for his application being allowed. 5. Per contra, learned Additional Government Advocate would support the impugned order. 6. Having heard the learned Advocates appearing for parties and on perusal of records, we find that the circular/G.O. relied upon by the petitioner would be inapplicable insofar as petitioner is concerned for two reasons. Firstly, petitioner is not an office bearer of Karnataka State Employees Association and merely because he has been elected unopposed to the post of Committee by itself would not qualify him to such umbrage under G.O. dated 31.05.2019 relied upon by him. The extant G.O. which has been relied upon in general clause 9A(vi) reads as under: Any Other Language 7. A bare reading of the above clause would indicate that in the event of an employee having been elected to the Karnataka State Government Employees Union as an Office bearer, he would be entitled to seek exemption from being transferred for one tenure.
A bare reading of the above clause would indicate that in the event of an employee having been elected to the Karnataka State Government Employees Union as an Office bearer, he would be entitled to seek exemption from being transferred for one tenure. However, if he continues for a further period i.e., elected for the second term, then said protection available under said Government order cannot be relied upon, since clause 9A(vi ) of G.O. dated 31.05.2019 cannot be extended even to such employees. 8. In the instant case, undisputedly petitioner claims to have contested for the election to the post for Member of Committee of lean State Government Employees Union and as such, he has been declared unopposed on 13.06.2019 which is subsequent to the order of transfer and as such on the date impugned order came to be passed GO dated 31.05.2019 was not applicable to petitioner. As such, on this second ground namely that election of the petitioner as a Member of Committee was subsequent to the order of transfer, he would not be entitled to seek protection under clause 9A(vi) of the G.O. dated 31.05.2019. 9. It is made clear that under the impugned order, place of posting has not been indicated and as such, State Government shall take steps to give petitioner place of posting forthwith and same shall be conveyed to the petitioner expeditiously at any rate within two weeks from today without waiting for copy of this order. 10. For myriad reasons above stated we are of the considered view that writ petition is liable to be rejected. Accordingly, it stands rejected subject to observation made herein above. 11. Learned Additional Government Advocate is permitted to file a memo of appearance for respondent Nos.1 to 3 within an outer limit of four weeks from today.