Civil Writ Petition No. 15016 of 2010 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No. 15016 of 2010 Date of decision: 22.02.2011 Dr. Amir Chand, Deputy Chief Medical Officer ...Petitioner Versus Union of India and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RANJIT SINGH Present: Mr. K.S. Sidhu, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Karminder Singh, Advocate, for respondent No.1. Mr. Arvind Mittal, Advocate, for respondent Nos.2 to 4. **** RANJIT SINGH J. The petitioner is working as Assistant Medical Officer in National Fertilizers Limited, Bathinda. The petitioner was transferred from Bathinda to the Unit at Panipat in the year 1994. He claims to be serving the department with sincerity and satisfaction of the superiors. He has made some allegation against respondent No. 4 Kulbhushan Verma, who is presently working as Executive Director with the office of the respondents. He was statedly posted with the petitioner at Panipat in the year 1996. As per the petitioner, respondent No. 4 is carrying grudge due to his good reputation and sincerity. The petitioner would further allege that due to personal grudge and mala fide, respondent No. 4 has transferred the petitioner Civil Writ Petition No. 15016 of 2010 2 from Panipat to NFL, Vijaypur, Guna, Madhya Pardesh. This order was passed on 01.01.2009. The petitioner has now challenged this order of transfer through the present writ petition on 20.08.2010. It appears that this order was subsequently cancelled but again passed on 23.05.2009. The petitioner has, thus, alleged that this order is not passed for any administrative reason but has actuated with malice and motive of respondent No. 4. The petitioner also states to be suffering from various ailments like drowsiness, genalised muscle fibrosis, developing cancer of right ear and right neck etc. The petitioner states that his transfer to such far off place is punitive. The petitioner had also prayed for staying his eviction from the house, which he was occupying at Panipat. While issuing notice, this Court stayed eviction of the petitioner from the residential house allotted to him at Panipat. As per the reply, the petitioner is an employee and is working on a transferable job. It is stated that National Fertilizers Limited has unit/office and keeping in view the exigencies and administrative requirements, the transfer policy has been formulated. The employee of the Corporation can be utilized anywhere as per the requirement. It is stated that on account of administrative consideration and with approval of the competent authority, the petitioner was transferred from Panipat to Vijaypur unit. The reply would also disclose that the petitioner had not reported for duty at Vijaypur despite numerous reminders. The petitioner apparently is absenting himself by not presenting himself at place of his duty. The petitioner rather has been charge sheeted on 19.04.2010 for acts of various misconducts. He has not so far filed any reply to the charge Civil Writ Petition No. 15016 of 2010 3 sheet within the stipulated time. Inquiry Officer has also been appointed to go into the charges, which is pending. As per the respondents by suppressing these facts, the petitioner has filed this writ petition. The allegation made against respondent No. 4 of he being biased is termed as totally baseless, false and are stated to have been made to with sole motive to prejudice the mind of this Court. It is pointed out that action of respondent No. 4 is bona fide and is taken on good faith. Accordingly, the prayer made for cancelling of the transfer of the petitioner is opposed. Heard, the counsel for the parties. Counsel for the petitioner would say that this transfer is not because of administrative reason but is actuated with malice of respondent No. 4. During the course of arguments, he made an attempt to give somewhat different colour and went to the extent of stating that respondent No. 4 is having a illicit relation with his wife and that is the cause of his transfer. When asked to substantiate these allegations, he could not show anything in this regard as is being projected during the course of arguments. This conduct of the petitioner is not appreciated. The petitioner could be expected to desist from making wild allegations just for the sake of transfer. The transfer is an incidence of service. Once the person is working on a transferable post, he normally is expected to obey the order of transfer. No legal rights or infringement thereof can be alleged when the person working on the transferable job is ordered to be transferred. There is not much substance in the submissions made by the counsel for the petitioner when he says that the petitioner was initially transferred on Civil Writ Petition No. 15016 of 2010 4 01.01.2009 and the petitioner till date has not joined at the place of transfer. The petitioner is absent and has not reported for duty. The petitioner had waited for over a year even to file a present writ petition to impugn his transfer order. When asked to explain this, the counsel could only say that the petitioner was representing against this transfer and hence he had not approached this Court on any earlier occasion. I am not impressed with this explanation. Obviously, having remained absent for considerable period, the petitioner has chosen to file this writ petition to challenge the transfer order. No justifiable cause is made out for calling the interference. The writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed. February 22, 2011 (RANJIT SINGH ) rts JUDGE