R.K. NABADWIP SINGH Vs. STATE OF MANIPUR AND ORS.
LAWS(GAU)-1994-3-18
HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI (FROM: IMPHAL)
Decided on March 18,1994

R.K. Nabadwip Singh Appellant
VERSUS
State of Manipur and Ors. Respondents


Referred Judgements :-

SMT. LOUSIDAM DASHU V. THE STATE OF MANIPUR [REFERRED TO]
BHIKHA RAM VS. RAM SARUP [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

J. Sangma, J. - (1.)BY this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution the Petitioner has questioned the order dated 9.2.94 (Annexure -A/5) issued by the Respondent No. 1 (The Commissioner of Industries, Government of Manipur) transferring him from Thoubal, where he was holding the charge of General Manager, DIC, to Imphal as Functional Manager in the Directorate of Industries.
(2.)THE Petitioner was holding the post of Functional Manager on ad hoc basis. By order dated 15.4.87 (Annexure -A/1) the Respondent No. 1 regularised his service as Functional Manager. As Functional Manager he was holding the charge of General Manager at Senapati. By order dated 12.6.90 (Annexure -A/2) he was transferred from Senapati to Thoubal where also he continued to hold the charge of General Manager. Then by order dated 23.7.90 (Annexure -A/2 -1) he was again transferred from Thoubal to Bishenpur; but there also he held the charge of General Manager. While he was holding the charge of General Manager at Bishenpur the Respondent No. 1 by order dated 25.9.91 (Annexure -A/3) appointed him to the post of General Manager on ad hoc promotion for a period of six months and posted in the same place. This period of six months expired on 24.3.92 and there was no extension of the appointment. But by order dated 21.12.91 (Annexure -A/4) the Respondent No. 1 transferred the Petitioner from Bishnupur to Ukhrul as General Manager. Thereafter by another order dated 18.10.92 (Annexure A/4 -l) the Respondent No. 1 again transferred the Petitioner from Bishenpur to Thoubal. This time also he was described as General Manager. Thus he functioned as General Manager for more than 2 years 4 months.
Though he was holding the charge of General Manager at Thoubal Respondent No. 1, by the impugned order dated 9.2.94 (Annexure A/5) transferred him to Imphul as Functional Manager in Directorate of Industries. So he now contends that after he held the charge of General Manager for more than 2 years 4 months the impugned order of transfer posting him in lower post as Functional Manager is illegal and arbitrary and it violated Article 14 and 16 of the Constitution. It is also his case that from 13.10.92 he has been at Thoubal for 1 year 4 months only; so there being no compelling reason the impugned transfer order is in breach of the instruction contained in the Memorandum dated 24.7.82 (Annexure -A/7) under which no transfer can be effected within a period of 3 years. Thirdly the Petitioner stated that he as the Member -Secretary of the Task Force Committee had questioned the selection of one Md. Kheiruddin of Haoreibi Atongkhong as beneficiary under the SEEUY Scheme in the meeting held on 30.11.93 at which the Deputy Commissioner warned him in the presence and hearing of other members whom he impleaded as Proforma Respondent Nos. 5, 6 and 7. He alleged that for that matter the Deputy Commissioner bore grudge against him; so on his initiation the impugned transfer order has been issued by way of punishment, On these grounds he prayed for quashing the transfer order.

(3.)ON 28.2.94 this court, gave interim relief which is as follows:
Post it after 10 (ten) days as motion. If affidavit can not be filed, the learned Addl. Govt. Advocate may produce the relevant file on that day. Until further orders, the order of transfer dated 9th February, 1994 shall remain suspended.



Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.