R.Rajeshkannan v. The Chairman
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 20.06.2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE Mr.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN and W.M.P.Nos.24821 and 24822 of 2025 R.Rajeshkannan ... Petitioner Vs.
1. The Chairman, The Tamil Nadu State Corporation, Secretariat, Chennai - 600 009.
2. The Managing Director, The Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation, (Coimbatore Division-I) Ltd., Head Office, No.37, Mettupalayam Road, Coimbatore - 641 043.
... Respondents Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records relating to the impugned proceedings of the second respondent in 11997/C1/HRD/TNSTC (CBE)/2025 dated 09.05.2025 quash the same as far as the petitioner is concerned and consequently direct the second respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 10.06.2025 and thereby permit the petitioner to continue to discharge his duties in Ooty Training 1/5
Centre or in any other alternative places were vacancies are there in Coonoor Branch, Kotagir Branch, Ooty I Branch and Ooty II Branch. For Petitioner : Dr.R.Gouri For Respondent : Mr.M.Murali Vinoth, Standing Counsel (for R2) *****
O R D E R
The instant writ petition has been filed challenging the proceedings dated 09.05.2025 passed by the second respondent.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner has undergone surgery. However, he was transferred 4 times within a period of 2 years. She would further contend that there are vacancies at Ooty itself. However, even without considering his medical grounds, he has been transferred from Ooty to Pollachi. She would also submit that there are still posts vacant in Ooty, Kotagiri, and Coonoor.
3. The learned Standing Counsel appearing for the second respondent 2/5
would submit that the transfer is only an administrative one; therefore, there is no ground to interfere with the impugned order.
4. I have given my anxious consideration to the submissions made on either side.
5. While looking at the submission made by the petitioner, she raises a medical ground to challenge the transfer. However, while exercising the power under judicial review, all these things cannot be gone into and have to be left to the wisdom of the Administrators, as it is a well-settled principle of law that transfer is an incidence of service.
6. At this juncture, this Court would like to note that the petitioner has given a representation to the second respondent on 10.06.2025. In view of this, while this Court finds no merit in the instant writ petition, it would like to issue a direction to the respondents to consider the petitioner's representation.
3/5
7. Accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed. However, the second respondent is directed to consider the petitioner's representation dated 10.06.2025 and pass orders on its own merits and in accordance with law, within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. No costs. 20.06.2025 kv Index : Yes/No Speaking order /Non Speaking Order To
1. The Chairman, The Tamil Nadu State Corporation, Secretariat, Chennai - 600 009.
2. The Managing Director, The Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation, (Coimbatore Division-I) Ltd., Head Office, No.37, Mettupalayam Road, Coimbatore - 641 043.
4/5
C.KUMARAPPAN, J.
kv 20.06.2025 5/5