M. Katju, J. - (1.) -This special appeal has been filed against the impugned judgment of the learned single Judge dated 21.7.2004. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have perused the record. In our opinion, this appeal deserves to be allowed.
(2.) THE writ petitioner (respondent No. 5 in this appeal) is a Lekhpal working in Aawal Khera, Tahsil Etmadpur, district Agra. By the order dated 11.6.2004, the petitioner was transferred within the same Tahsil in Agra district. The learned single Judge interfered with the impugned order on the ground that it was violative of certain Government orders. It is well-settled that a transfer order cannot be interfered with by this Court merely because it violates some Government order. It is only if the transfer order violates the statutory rules or is mala fide that the Court can interfere vide Dharam Chand v. State of U. P., 2003 (52) ALR 506 ; Shilpi Bose v. State of Bihar, AIR 1991 SC 532 ; Union of India v. N. P. Thomas, AIR 1993 SC 1605 ; Union of India v. S. L. Abbas, AIR 1993 SC 2444. The same view has been taken by this Court in Riyaz v. Addl. Registrar, 2002 (5) ESC 124 ; Pramod Charan Saxena v. Director Panchayat Raj, 2002 (5) ESC 34 ; Lakhan Singh v. State of U. P., 1983 AWC 195 and Veerpal Singh v. State of U. P., 1983 AWC 165, etc. It is well-settled that transfer is an exigency of service and the High Court should not ordinarily interfere with the same.
(3.) THE issue of transfer and posting has been considered time and again by the Apex Court and the entire law has been settled by a catena of decisions. It is entirely for the competent authority to decide when, where and at what point of time a public servant is to be transferred from his present posting. Transfer is not only an incident but an essential condition of service, Vide Union of India v. S. L. Abbas, AIR 1993 SC 2444 ; Shilpi Bose v. State of Bihar, AIR 1991 SC 532 ; Union of India v. N. P. Thomas, AIR 1991 SC 1605 ; Chief Manager (Tel.) N. E. Telecom Circle v. Rajendra Ch. Bhattacharjee, AIR 1995 SC 813 ; State of U. P. v. Dr. R. N. Prasad, 1995 (Suppl) 2 SCC 151 ; Union of India and others v. Ganesh Dan Singh, 1995 (Suppl) 3 SCC 214 ; N. K. Singh v. Union of India and others, (1994) 6 SCC 98 ; Abani Kante Ray v. State of Orissa, 1996 (1) AWC 2.14 (SC) (NOC) : 1995 (Suppl) 4 SCC 169 ; National Hydroelectric Power Corporation Ltd. v. Shri Bhagwan, 2001 (4) AWC 3053 SC) : (2001) 8 SCC 574 ; State Bank of India v. Anjan Sanyal and others, AIR 2001 SC 1748 and Public Services Tribunal Bar Association v. State of U. P. and others, 2003 (2) AWC 968 (SC) : (2003) 4 SCC 104, etc. An employee holding a transferable post cannot claim any vested right to work on a particular place as a transfer order does not affect any of his legal rights and the Court cannot interfere with a transfer/posting. In Gujarat Electricity Board v. Atma Ram Sungomal Poshani, AIR 1989 SC 1433, the Supreme Court has observed as under : "Transfer of a Government servant appointed to a particular cadre of transferable posts from one place to the another is an incident of service. No Government servant or employee of a public undertaking has a legal right for being posted at any particular place. Transfer from one place to another is generally a condition of service and the employee has no choice in the matter. Transfer from one place to another is necessary in public interest and efficiency in the public administration.";