Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2022 DIGILAW 3186 (MAD)

M. Thiagarajan v. Managing Director, Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation, Vellore

2022-09-07

R.SURESH KUMAR

body2022
JUDGMENT : (Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for issuance of a Writ of Certiorari calling for the records of the impugned order passed in ref.No.20016/41540/BMTPR/TNSTC(VPM)VLR.Reg./2022, dated 8.6.2022 of the 3rd respondent of transferring the petitioner to Ambur Depot and quash the same as illegal and arbitrary.) 1. The prayer sought for herein is for a writ of certiorari calling for the records of the impugned order passed in Ref.No.20016/41540/BMTPR/TNSTC(VPM)VLR. Reg./2022, dated 8.6.2022 of the 3rd respondent of transferring the petitioner to Ambur Depot and quash the same as illegal and arbitrary. 2. The petitioner has been working as Driver at the respondent Transport Corporation, while so against whom a show cause notice was issued on 03.06.2022 stating that the petitioner on a particular date has not worked for duty, however his name has been mentioned in the roll call thereby he has violated a Code of Conduct and therefore before initiating the disciplinary action against the petitioner, the said show cause notice on 03.06.2022 was given giving only three days time to the petitioner to reply. Within the three days time, the petitioner did not reply or he could not reply, however the petitioner had given a detailed reply on 20.06.2022. 3. However, before such reply was given, on 08.06.2022 the respondent Transport Corporation passed an order transferring the petitioner from Thirupathur Depot to Ambur Depot, that order dated 08.06.2022 is under challenge herein. 4. Heard Mr.G.Saravanakumar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Ms.S.Pavithra, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents. 5. Even though the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents wants to justify the order impugned stating that, it is a mere transfer order simpliciter, that has been passed only for administrative reasons as it does not attach with any stigma, therefore the order cannot be challenged, this Court finds that before issuing this impugned order of transfer, a show cause notice already been issued on 03.06.2022 asking show cause from the petitioner within three days time, otherwise action would be initiated against him. 6. 6. If at all the petitioner has not given reply within three days time, if he has given reply belatedly i.e. on 20.06.2022, before which if the respondent Transport Corporation wants to take action to initiate any disciplinary action against the petitioner, that could have been taken and that could have been decided at the hands of the respondent Transport Corporation. 7. However, the respondent Corporation has chosen to transfer the petitioner by order dated 08.06.2022 whereby though it is claimed by the respondent that it is an order of transfer simpliciter, on factual matrix one can easily find that the transfer order is nothing but a punitive transfer, pursuant to the show cause notice already issued dated 03.06.2022. 8. It is a settled proposition that the transfer cannot be the answer to the alleged dereliction of duty on the part of the employee and in this regard it is open to the employer to take disciplinary action but not issuing order of transfer and since the transfer is not an order of transfer simpliciter, this Court feels that the impugned transfer order dated 08.06.2022 is liable to be interfered with. 9. It was brought to the notice of this Court by the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents that the petitioner has not reported duty till date. 10. However, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that since the petitioner challenged the transfer order, he could not report duty in the place from where he had been originally transferred i.e. at Thirupathur Depot and that is the reason why the petitioner has approached this Court and filed the writ petition. 11. I have considered the said submissions made by both sides and have perused the materials placed before this Court. 12. For the aforestated reasons, this Court is inclined to pass the following order in this writ petition: That the impugned transfer order is hereby set aside. As a sequel the petitioner is hereby directed to report duty to the respondent Corporation at Thirupathur Depot forthwith i.e. on or before 09.09.2022. Once the petitioner reports duty, the respondent Transport Corporation is hereby directed to press him into service. As a sequel the petitioner is hereby directed to report duty to the respondent Corporation at Thirupathur Depot forthwith i.e. on or before 09.09.2022. Once the petitioner reports duty, the respondent Transport Corporation is hereby directed to press him into service. It is made clear that this order would not stand in the way against the respondent Transport Corporation to initiate any disciplinary action against the petitioner if at all the respondent Transport Corporation still feels that such action is required against the petitioner. 13. With this observation, this Writ Petition is ordered accordingly. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.