Sunil Kumar Bharve v. State of Chhattisgarh

Mr. Vaibhav Shukla, Advocate. For Respondents/State : Mr. Amrito Das, Additional A.G. Hon'ble Shri Ju Narendra Kumar Vyas Order on Board

16.08.2022 1) The petitioner who is working as District Employment Officer at District Employment Centre Manendragarh, District: Korea (C.G.) has challenged the transfer order dated 08.07.2022 whereby, the petitioner has been transferred from Manendragarh, District: Korea to District Employment Centre, District: Sukma. 2) Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that petitioner has completed 22 years in the scheduled area Manendragarh and thereafter he has been again transferred to the scheduled area at Sukma, which is against the posting policy of the State Government dated 03.06.2015. He would further submit that he is aged about 57 years and as per the policy dated 03.06.2015, the government employee who is above 55 years age should not be transferred to Scheduled Area. 3) It is well settled principle of law that the personal difficulties and personal disablement should be considered by the Government while considering the transfer of its employee.

Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of S.K. Naushad Rahaman & Other Vs. Union of India & Other [Civil Appeal No. 1243/2022 decided on 10/03/2022] has observed in para 53, which reproduced as below:- “53 In considering whether any modification of the policy is necessary, they must bear in mind the need for a proportional relationship between the objects of the policy and the means which are adopted to implement it. The policy above all has to fulfill the test of legitimacy, suitability, necessity and of balancing the values which underlie a decision making process informed by constitutional values. Hence, while we uphold the judgment of the Division Bench of the Kerala High Court, we leave it open to the respondents to revisit the policy to accommodate posting of spouses, the needs of the disabled and compassionate grounds. Such an exercise has to be left within the domain of the executive, ensuring in the process that constitutional values which underlie Articles 14, 15 and 16 and Article 21 of the Constitution are duly protected.

The appeals shall be disposed of in the above terms” 4) Considering the aspects of the matter that the petitioner remained posted more than 20 years in a scheduled area, he has been posted at scheduled area, as such, the transfer order of the petitioner shall remain stayed. 5) It is directed the petitioner will make a representation before the concerned authorities within three weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order and the respondent authorities will consider the same within further period of four weeks from receipt of representation. Till the representation is decided, the transfer of the petitioner shall remain stayed. The respondents authorities are directed to consider the case of the petitioner as per law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter S.K. Naushad Rahaman & Others (Supra). 6) With the aforesaid observations & directions, this petition is disposed of. Saurabh Sd/- (Narendra Kumar Vyas) Judge