^•^- PB'TI'EieMEEli aE£PGNDENa*Si 1 IH SiE HIGH CBuia' OP JUDICA'EDRES OiH&IISG&RH t A2! BIlASPUR. W.P. HO. l>/'X5/200l Shartiya Koyala Adhikari Sangb BSanch Soath Eastern Coal rield Iifed. througb Convener Govind Prasad 'Eiwaci, aged about 55 years S/o Shri jagannatb Prasad liwari. Persoanel Manager, Soutb o'hagraklaaa^ Oolliery S.iJ.tt. Office Hsadee &E-ea| | j lahsil Maneniaragarb District Koriya |, Cbhatisgarb. V/s Coal India Limited fehrough its Chalrman, Ooal Bha-wan,. 10 Ne'taji Sulatiash » Road, calcatta. ^ Chief Qeneral Manager CPersonnel) Coa.1 Iriaia Ltd. coal Bhawan, 10, Netaji Subhash Road, Cslcutta. 3. South Eastecn Coal rield Ltd., •ehrough its ChalniiaR-euia-tianag.Lng Oirector, Sheepat Road Bilaspur. Bssrcios 'asDm &tUcia<ES 226/227 or 'EHE CDNS'EI'FUISBH BB'E&B-.S OF PSCJSIOH 1. garticalars e£ tbe peti'tl.oners HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE eHHATTISGARH, AT BILASPUR Writ Petition' No.570 of 2001 Bhartiya Koyaia Adhikari Sangh Vs, Coal India Limited & others Writ Petition No.571 of 2001 Bhartiya Koyala Adhikari Sangh VS. Coal India Liinited & others Writ Petition No. 572 of 2001 Bhartiya Koyala Adhikari Sangh VS. coal India Llmited & others Writ Petition No. 573 of 2001 Coalmines OfficersAssociation of India VS. Coal Indla Limited £< others Present! For Petitioners : For Respondents ; Shri S.K. Gangele, Advocate Shri^Manindra Shrivastava, Advocate Shri^P.S.Nair, Senior Advocate ShrilP.S. Koshv, Adv^cate^ O R D E R By_W.A.Shishak. C.J.- In these four writ petitions order of transfer dated 9.4.2001 issued by the respondent no.l has been assailed. In the said order of transfer as many as 595 high ranking officers of Goal India Limited are involved. The said transfer is from -2- one company to another being located in different areas of tbe country. After hearlng counsel represent- ing- the parties it is now clear that barring about foxirteen officers the rest have already joined thelr places of posting in compliance with the order of transfer. 2. Shri S.K. Gangele appears for the petitioners in W.p.No.570. 571 and 572 of 2001 and Shri Minindra Shrivastava for the writ petitioner inW.P.No.573 of 2001. Shri P.S. Nair learned Senior Counsel with Shri B°S.Koshy appears on behalf of the respondents. 3.. Though Shri P.S. Nair learned counsel for the respondents has urged that the petitions should be decided on the question of maintainability and though I have Indeed given him some time in this regard to make his submissions as regards the preli- minary objection raised on behalf of the respondents, having felt that it would he more convenient and appropriate for me to hear tKe entire petition on merit I have heard the learned counsel representing the parties at length. It ,may also be stated at this stage that in the present order of transfer only officers of the Gr^des of M-1 and M-2 are involved. It may further be stated that petitioners in W.P.No. 570/2001 and W.P.No. 571/2001 have already joined their places of posting, At the time of hearing Shri Gangele has npt made any specific suibmission in respect of ttie aforesaid two writ petitions though generally the order of transfer has been impugned. Main submission has been made with reference to W.P..NO. 572/2001. In this petition the petitioner is a registered association. Subse- quently, an intervention petition has been filed by one A.K. Patnaik who is said to have been affected •spT?B'[Biu spBtu uesq s'ey jsjsuej^ SL|^ ^BL)^ pspus^uoo; S-F q.T 'SOUSH 'peiosj^e aq TTeLIS s^osdso-ld s^n^n? -TT3tI^ t^i-14 uOTSUsqsadde SA'ei4 Asq^ 's^o^a^aqj, • ssTUBdtuoo BUT^PUI sso-[ o-> ssTueduiOo 6u-j-s{eui tTg:03d wosy psjjs^sus-r^ ussq 3ABq SJSUOT^T^Sd 3114 ^.BLn ST- SSSD ^usss^d sq-?. UT US'H^^ uasq SBL) I.BL]^ souBAS'l-j6 UTBUI SUQ 'pSLlonoq. ussq ^ou SAey Au^diuoo aiues sq^ -tspun 3073:30 3:0 SS(U'E.I ^ua-[BA'i:nbs pue .IB'['];UJTS 6uT:PTOt< suosjrsd pe^en^.ts A'[-ieT:-[-luTS 'pa-i^sjsuBj^ sq 04 ^y5nos e^e sjeuo-yif^3^ sq^ tiSnoq^ ^Bto. sy 3-[s6uEo fl^s ?o uo-FssTUiqns j3L|^-(nj[ 'psso-rosTP A-[jBato uesq ^ou ssq .isjsue.t'q. i.|3ns .103: UOSBSJ: sq^ •^'eq^. p3^.-4.Tluc[ns 33l)^3nj OST® s-i; q.i •pSMOftog; uaeq seq ssooi|o pu^ X^Td 3:0 AoTiod •e 'iu-cy o^. SUTP-IOOOV '.xs?suej'^ teuujou puBSi-dui-jrs jo eseo s ^ou s-i: ^usss-id 31^^ •l.Eq-i s^Ttuqns StsEuBO T-Il<S 'S "pa^Turn 3tn-t-I:1SUI 6UTu6-rsaa PUB Bu-cuueid ssuyw •[ej^uss (8) pue .'ps-tTiUT-q spTS-i:?-[e°0 Tpeuet|Bw (4) ips-^Tciun spTST?TB03 T1e-I'^ua3 (9) •'PS4T"ln SPTST?TB<33 u-is^seg (g) .' ps-i-cui-n Auedmoo 1^03 SUT-^OO •^eaEqg (^) <ps'4T'UT'I spta'(:3T:eo3 u-tsq^-iON (£) .'ps^Turpq spisi:?TBC>3 uja^seg y^nog (z) .'ps^Turn spTeTj-[eoo UJSI.SSM (T ) 'A'[3uieu 'ssTusduioo Aje-ypTsqns ^.qS-rs sje sasyj. °s^uapuodss^ sq-t Aq ps-i-i:? ujn^a-l 3LC» jo 1:1 qdsj[6e^ed spTA Au^diuoo BUTPTOLI E ST P3:tTUITT: BTPUI Tecl0 't' •ps^Ttu-rq -03 "[B03 5u-ci[00 -te.iBtfa 0-4 p333sjsus.t-» uasq seq eq luaunuTodd^ STL] ^ia-^fe sun-i ISJT? 9141 ^03: teq^ pu^ ^TP"! T'8°3 Act p3^UT:odd® SBM 5n-eu':tBd T-nIS ^eq^ pepue^uoo ST 1.1 • E£ •Ofl'~[S ^B ssjnST:? JSOTJJO P-]:BS 314^ ?o auiBu s'qj, •-ts^su^.lt ?o jsp30 sq^ Aq -£- -4- 6. Shri Manindra Sbrivastava appearing for the 66 officers in W.P.No. 573 of 2001 submits that the petition has been filed in representative capacity. The manner in which petition has been file d has been vehemently criticised by Shri P.S. Nair appearing for the respondents. According to Shri Nair, each offlcer is to approach this Court by filing separate writ petition^- and by affixing requisite Court fees required under the relevant provision of law. Accord- ing to Shri Nair even on fchis ground alone the writ petltion should go. Shri Shrivastava submits that the inter-company transfers sought to be made in the present case are abnormal and they have not been done in a routine normal way. According to shri Shrivastava, large scale transfer is to be avoided. It has also been submitted by Shri Shrivastava that while issuing ttie impugned order there 1-ias been infraction of'the policy made by the coinpany. It is also further submitted that none of the officers has completed twenty years of service and, therefore, the order of transfer is bad. I shall advert to the submission as regards the infraction of policy of transfer when I examine the siibmissions made on behalf of the respondents. Shri Shrivastava also supports the submission made by Shri Gangele that the impugned transfer by which the petitioners have been transferred from profit making companies to the loss making companii is not bonafide and has ^no't been made in publlc interest, but in fact it has been made malafide inasmuc as the petitioners' interest is likely to be affected in the event the loss making companies are ultimately wound-up. It is the submission of Shri Shrivastava that in fact there is ndi decision by the competent authority to transfer cartain offlcers from proflt -5- making companies to the loss making companies. According to 5hri shrivastava, the entire exercise of transfer has been made only by the Director and not by the competent authority though the Chairman of the company has ^iven his endorsement on the document prepared by the Director•, The further submission of Shri Shrivastava is that the order of transfer has often been used by the employer as a powerful weapon while dealing with the employees particularly when the employer is incllned fco accommodate in some more comfortable places a chosen and favoured fewa^Such action can bring about frustration in the matter of service of very many honest officers. A submission, therefore, has been made that the relevant records where the process of transfer was initiated should be called for to see what actually motivated the authority to pass the impugned order of transfer. This submission has been made on the basis th.at the order of transfer has been issued not in public interest but for some extraneous considerations. 7» In the liqht of the submissions recorded above, it is necessary that we now examine the order of transfer. Invariably in the order of- transf.er in respect of the officers the following order was issued on tbe same ctay i.e. 9.4a2001 :- " OR D E R The following Executives of Mining discipline in M-1 grade are hereby transferred in thelr existing grade/ capacity to the company as indicated against each with immediate effect. " Names of the transferred officers are printed there- after. It is thereafter mentioned :- -6- y> The above executives sliould be released from the respective company immediately, but not later than 20th April, 2001. On being released from their present company of posting the above executives (except Sl.No.80 & 81) will report to the Chairman/MS- Director of the respective subsidiary company where they have been transferred for their further assignment. Sl. No. 80 & 81 will report to CCTM, NEC, Guwahati for their further assignment. This -Lssues with the approval of the Competent Authority. " 8« In order to appreciate the issue Involved in the present petition, it is necessary that we look at the decision minu^ed in the 1st CMDs meet held on 3rd Mardh, 2001. i Transfer policy recorded at the said meeting is at para 4.1 as follows :~ " 4ol. Transfer Polic^ Director (P & IR) explained that as per the existing transfer policy of 1994, executives of Ml, M2 and M3 grades are required to be transferred inter-company on completion of 10 years stay in a company. To avoid large scale transfer, 20% of executives satisfying the above criteria are belng transferred from one company to another every year. However, over the years a large nurriber of executives who have completed 20 years and above in Ml, M2 and M3 grades and who have more tlnan 2 years to retire are still working in the companies. After discussion it was decided that in the first phase those executives in Ml, M2 and M3 grades;who have completed 22 years or more service in one company and having more tban 2 years to retire will be trans- ferred to other subsid-Laries. This will be subject to| the conditions mentioned in the transfpr policy." At the 3rd CMDs meet heia on 1st April, 2001 the minutes of the 1st CMDS meet held on 3rd March, 2001 were considered. It may, however, be stated that as regards the length of service rendered by an officer at a particular place some |change was effected. Such change has been recorded in para 5.e. as follows : " S.e. In the earlier CMDs' Meet, it was decided that executlves of Ml, M2 and M3 grades stayirig in a particular company for more than 22 years will be transferred intercompany. It was decided to revise the criteria of i-eriod of stay in a company ' from 22 to 20 years." Consequent to the decisions taken by the CMDs as aforesaid, the following order came to be issued by the Director (P & IR) on 5.4.2001 : " In terms of the decision of 1st CMDs meet held on 01.03.2001 and subsequent decision of 3rd !CMDs meet held on 04.04.2001 in Gonnection wlth the transfer of executives of Ml, M2 & M3 grades in dlfferent disciplines, the following norms j.s being adopted in effecting the transfer of executives : 1) The officers who have completed 20 years of service in the company. 2) Officers of WCL, SECL, MCL and NCL will be transferred to BCCL, ECL and CCL. The vacancy so caused in these four subsi- diaries will be filled up by transferring executives from BCCL, ECL and CCL based on their station seniority and the remain- ing executives of DCCL, ECL and CCL will be rotated within these three subsidiaries» 3) The following categories of executives will be exempted from transfer this year: i) ii) Those who have less than two years to retire as on 31.03.2001. Projects of more than 100 crores belonging to Mining & Excavation Disciplines. iii) World Bank Projects belonging to Mining s< Excv. -8- iv) Longwall and New Technology belonging fco Mining and E & M disciplines. v) R & R executives, . vi) Medical Officers of Ml, M2 & M3 grades. 4) CMPDI executives. The executives posted in CMPDIL are per- forming specialised nature of jobs and most of them cannot be gainfully utilised in producing companies. To the extent possible they will be re-cteployed/transferred within CMPDIL. Those whose services can be utilised in other subsidiaries will be transferred. " On the body of the said order, the Chairman endorsed as "agreed . As stated above, shri Manindra Shrivastava and Shri S.K.Gangele have strerjpusly urged •'i—\- that the aforesaid order was not authorised and the Director is not the competent authority to have issued the above order. Shri P.s. Koshy,learned counsel for the respondents, submits that the above order was issued by the Director (Personnel) as it is he who should take necessary action after the competent authority had already taken policy decision as regards transfer. It is the submission of Shri Koshy that the Director's action is slmply by way of implemen- tation of the policy decision. It is further argued by Shri Shrivastaya and Shri Gangele that since the above order was sought to be communicated to the Minister of Coal it must be inferred that the order of transfer has been Issued with some ulterior motive and for some extraneous consideration, and not bonafide It may be reiterated tbat Shri shrivastava and shrl Gangele submlt that tbere is a proposal to refer the loss making company of BCCL to BIFR because net losses.o£ the company have exceeded the net wealth of the company and that there is a definite proposal -9- in Coal India Limited to close the loss making companies. This submission has been made with reference to the recommendation of the Geetha Krishhan Committee that there is a proposal to make fully Board managed companies seven coal producing subsi- diaries of Coal India Limited. According to the learned counsel, all the subsidiary companies including the SECL would virtually become independent companies. In such event, according to the learned counsel, the interest of the petitioners will certainly be adversely affected. 9» Shri Koshy, learned counsel for the res- pondents, refers me to Annexure-R/1 of the return filed in W.PoNo. 573/2001 to bring home the fact that each of the offlcers holds transferable post inasmuch as in the terms of appointment invariably this condition is stipulated. The said Annexure-R/1 is dated 30th March, 1977 addressed to one Shri George Philip in the matter of his appointment by the Chief of Personnel Division. Relevant for the purpose of the present case is clause-xvi of the said document which is to the following effect : "xvi) You shall be liable to serve in any part of India and will be governed by the rules and regulations of service and admiRistrative orders of the Company in force from time to time." Shri Koshy further refers me to Common Coal Cadre which is applicable to establishments in Coal Xndia Limited and its subsidiary companies. Transfer Policy is dealt wlth in Chapter'X. Among other things it is stated as follows : seq 333:eue3-^ 3:0 .ispso sq-^ qons SB pus SOTA^SS 50 SJBSA og ps-^s'cdiuos SBL| S-ISOTJJO sqt 3:0 suou ^BI.)^ siu 3^0 jsq psss^Aueo ussq s'et) •^f L|6noyj, •-[I 'p.l'eSs^ STM^ UT psqjJosa.ld ADT'[Od SL|^ JO MSTA-Iind 314^. u-]:L]^Tn psnssT uaeq SBLI -isjsu^-t^ ?o jap30 sl-l^ ^'eq^! rtet:A 3l]t 30 uie i 'spJOn .laq^o ui '.isjsue.i^. jo ^sp-io sq^ Sufnss-t UT: psj^s^u-i; sq ueo 3p-];3:1ETetU ou 'MST:'ft- ^w UT 'sseo ^uasasd SL]^ 30 ss.sue-^sumojTo pue s^oe^ 33-[:^us si|^ uj '^eAo^duo eyi 50 aSB^UEApe ^ssq aq^. o-t sssAoTduia sq-» 3:0 SSOT-AJSS SL|^ SSTTT^" °t Pai^T^u3 ST ot)n jaAo-[diu3 sq^. s-(: •q.-i: -[•[B js^jv •ps-^-[nB3: sq A-['[eaj ^OUUBO s33UOT^Ttec^ aq-1. 50 ssjsue^-t 3:0 ssq.ieiu aq^ UT s^uspuodsaj sq^ 50 uo-r-i.oe 3^4 t'et-i^ s>u o-^ JBSTO si.Trnb suisss I.T 'S.TpBO •[BOQ UOUIIU03 UT pa&BS-['AUS AoTTOd .133:30^3^ pue tustuiutodde jo suo"|"iTpuoo sqi. OS-IE pue u'euj.XTEyo sq^ Aq p3AO-[dde/pes30pu3 sen yo-pyw jo^osj-ca ?o aspao jo souenssT ^usnbsscpns SL)^ puc A'^.T30L(-ins ^ue^sdiuoo sq-t Aq US-^B-I. suo-fs-tosp Ao-t-[od 3L]t pue xooz*^°6 pstsp ^s?sue3:^ 50 ^spjo psuBnduuT SL|^ A-[3B1[n3-):^|.j;e^ ' si.uaiunoop ^ueAeis-i aq^ 3:0 -[esn^sd •[n?ajea uodn •01 ,,'''4Us'[B'4 •[e-i'ssBeuBiu 30 ^usiudo-[3Asp pue ssii luniuT^do sq^. s'[qeus p'[now AsL.1^ se p3^o3?5S A^ss-i? aq p'[noqs -isy^oue o^. Auediuoo suo uio-i? stsuuos^sd 30 ^s^suej:^ STSAST -tsq6Tl< ^v •spuno^S 3A-|:^BJ^sT"TluP% uo sJis^suBj^ qons oq. 3^q .ou sq ptnoys a-istlt qfinoy^ 'pe-^os^js sq A-[T[EUI30U 40U TTTM -tStf^OUB Ot Auediuoo auo tuoj? noisq pue s-a 30 Asd 3:0 ss'[^os sq-i. UT -[auuosssd jo js^supat ^.'eqi. ps^ESTAUs SBM ^i •ssAT^nosxa ?o .isgisuea-^ Bufp3e6s3 pswotTOj aq o-^ ssTC1T3UT3d 31.11 psxjTssds peL| 'ssuTTspTnfi asq^o ^sSuouiB 'qo-ryn 's-ipEo •[•eoo uoiuuioo B wsoj o^. SBM 'PS&BSTAUS Aueduioa sq^ t|3l:L|n 'sSAT^osCqo sqi 50 suo •pei.Tui'n BT-PUI 1^03 50 uoT^euiao^ SL)^ y:t-TMu -OT- ^^y»,J-aai&A..L=iBl,isu. ,^' ./" • -11- been. issued in violation of the transfer policy of the company, it has bee'n clarified that though change of name of the company mlght have taken place, the petitioners indeed have been serving at one place or the othec foe twenty years or more. There- fore, on this ground the petitioners cannot resist the order of transfer effectively. As against the submission made on behalf of the petitioners that similarly situated persons have been left untouched while issuing the order of transfer, it has been clarified by the ri->spondents that those officers who have not been affected by the present order of transfer are currently engaged in important project works. Such situation is clearly stipulated in the a.i2EB*niuueait order itself. 12,, In the light of the facts that I have recorded above, it is not necessary for me to refer to the;decisions cited by the parties in the present case» 13 ,, In the r.esult, in the pcemises aforesaid, these petitions fail and they are accordingly disrnissed, bowever, without any ca"der as to costs. Interim order stands vacated. Sd/W.A.SHISHAK CHIEF JUSTICfc; ^g-5-2001.-. Nair/*