1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 22.12.2011 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.RAJA W.P.(MD)No.14675 of 2011 and M.P.(MD).No.1 of 2011 S.K.Ramanathan ... Petitioner Vs. 1. The Director Elementary Education, Chennai. 2. The District Elementary Educational Officer, District Elementary Educational Office, Thanjavur (Rural), Thanjavur. ... Respondents Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorari calling for the records pertaining to the impugned order dated 17.12.2011 passed by the second respondent herein in his Na.Ka.No.6150/Aa1/2011 and quash the same. For Petitioner : Mr.D.R.Murugesan For Respondents : Mrs.S.Bharathi Government Advocate O R D E R The present writ petition is directed against the impugned order of transfer passed by the second respondent, the District Elementary Educational Officer, Thanjavur (Rural), wherein the petitioner was transferred from the Panchayat Union Middle School, Thenperambur, Panaveli, Thanjavur District to Panchayat Union Elementary School, Lakshmipuram, Thanjavur (Rural), which is 40 kms away from the present place. 2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has contended that the impugned order of transfer has been passed not on administrative ground but on the basis of some complaints to which the petitioner has no knowledge and no enquiry has been held on the said complaint. Since the petitioner is transferred on the basis of some complaints given by an unknown person, it amounts to punitive transfer and therefore the order of transfer, which is impugned in this Writ petition is liable to be interfered by this Court. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 3. In support of his submissions, he has also relied upon the following Judgments: (i) In the case of S.SEVUGAN v. THE CHIEF EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, VIRUDHUNAGAR DISTRICT reported in 2006 (2) CTC 468, paragraph No.7 has been relied upon to state that if a person is transferred from one place to another on the basis of any complaint, certainly such person is entitled for proper opportunity to defend himself as to whether the complaints given against him is proper or not by way of an enquiry. Under this circumstances in the said Judgment it has been held that the transfer order passed by way of punishment without giving opportunity is illegal. (ii) In the another case of R.MOHANASUNDARAM v. THE PRINCIPAL CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS AND OTHERS reported in 2009 (5) CTC 231, it has been held that if a Government servant is transferred by any order of transfer by way of punishment, such order of transfer is liable to interfered with. 4. Though the said principles are usually being followed, the case of the present petitioner is quite different. Firstly the petitioner has been transferred to a little distance of 40 kms from the present place and secondly the petitioner was posted on 09.06.2009. As petitioner has been working from 09.06.2007 and he has been transferred only to a reasonable distance of 40 kms, I do not find any merits in the impugned order of transfer to interfere with, as the said order is passed on administrative ground. 5. Accordingly, the Writ Petition fails and the same is dismissed. Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed. No costs. Sd/- Assistant Registrar (RTI) /True Copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar To 1. The Director Elementary Education, Chennai. 2. The District Elementary Educational Officer, District Elementary Educational Office, Thanjavur (Rural), Thanjavur. +1 CC to Special Government Pleader (SR.No.46009) W.P.(MD)No.14675 of 2011 22.12.2011 rj2 NSV/26.12.11/2P/4C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/