R.Vanaraj v. The Principal Chief

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 26.07.2016

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.RAJA W.P(MD).No.13104 of 2016 and W.M.P.(MD).No.9885 of 2016 R.Vanaraj ...

Petitioner Vs.

1.The Principal Chief Conservator of Forests, Panagal Buildings, Saidapet, Chennai-15.

2.The Conservator of Forests, Tirunelveli Region, Tirunelveli-7.

3.The District Forest Officer, Kanyakumari Division, Nagercoil.

4.The District Forest officer, Thoothukudi Division, Thoothukudi.

...

Respondents Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records relating to the impugned transfer order dated Nil passed by the second respondent in Pa.AA.No.21/2016 and quash the same as illegal and consequently direct the second respondent to entertain the petitioner's appeal dated 21.05.2016. For petitioner : M/s.S.Sukumar For Respondents : Mr.R.Anandharaj Government Advocate

ORDER

Mr.R.Vanaraj, challenges the transfer order of the second respondent on the ground that there is no reason mentioned in the impugned order dated 21.05.2016 for transferring the petitioner from Kanyakumari District to Tuticorin District. 2.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that after putting 11 years of unblemished record of service, the petitioner was reverted from Forest Guard to Forest Watcher on account of departmental proceedings initiated by the respondents https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

against the petitioner. While so, without assigning any reason, whatsoever, in the impugned order of transfer, the respondents arbitrarily exercised their power by transferring the petitioner from Kanyakumari District to Tuticorin District. The petitioner has been put to double jeo-pardy within a short span of time, that too, when the appeal, dated 21.05.2016, is pending on the file of the respondents. He further submitted that the transfer is nothing but punitive in nature. Therefore, this impugned order is liable to be set aside.

3.

Mr.R.Anandharaj, learned Government Advocate was put on notice for the respondents.

4.

Be that as it may, it is well settled legal position that the transfer of service is not only an incident service, but also a condition of service, which the employee has to gladly accept it. Needless to mention that once an employer comes to the conclusion that a Government Servant has to be transferred from one place to another place on administrative grounds, the reason need not be mentioned in the impugned order, as alleged by the petitioner, in this Writ Petition. Therefore, the petitioner cannot challenge the correctness of the impugned transfer order merely on the ground that no reason is mentioned in the impugned transfer order. This Writ Petition is bereft of any merits. Under the said circumstance, this Writ Petition is liable to be dismissed.

5.

Accordingly, this Writ Petition is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar (CS-I) /True Copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar To 1.The Principal Chief Conservator of Forests, Panagal Buildings, Saidapet, Chennai-15.

2.The Conservator of Forests, Tirunelveli Region, Tirunelveli-7. 3.The District Forest Officer, Kanyakumari Division, Nagercoil. 4.The District Forest officer, Thoothukudi Division, Thoothukudi. +1cc to Mr.S.SUKUMAR, Advocate Sr.No.39975 +1cc to Spl.Government Pleader Sr.No.39741 W.P(MD).No.13104 of 2016 and W.M.P.(MD).No.9885 of 2016 26.07.2016 ssm SH/NGM-MP/SAR-III:28.07.2016:2P/7C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/