Date of Complaint and Date of Transfer is Same: Allahabad High Court Quashes ‘Perverse’ Transfer Order

In a significant judgment, the Allahabad High Court has quashed a transfer order issued by the Uttar Pradesh government, terming it “perverse” and “illegal” due to the lack of a proper fact-finding inquiry. The case, WRIT – A No. – 5198 of 2024, was heard by Justice Rajesh Singh Chauhan at the Lucknow Bench of the Allahabad High Court.

The petitioner, Prakhar Saxena, a Junior Assistant in the office of Deputy Director Agriculture, Bareilly, challenged his transfer order dated 30.06.2024 to the office of Deputy Director Agriculture, Bahraich. The transfer was purportedly made on administrative grounds.

The crux of the case revolved around a complaint letter dated 30.06.2024 from the Deputy Director Agriculture, Bareilly, to the Director Agriculture, U.P., Lucknow. The letter alleged that the petitioner “could not prepare the files within time and is not following the directions of superior officers”.

Ms. Ritika Singh, counsel for the petitioner, argued that the transfer order was issued on the same day as the complaint without any verification of the allegations. She contended that a fact-finding inquiry was necessary to ascertain the truth of the complaints before issuing a transfer order.

Ms. Parul Bajpai, Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the state, argued that the transfer was not solely based on the complaint but also because the petitioner had completed about 9 years of service in Bareilly. However, she admitted that this reason was not mentioned in the transfer order.

In his judgment, Justice Chauhan observed:

“The date of complaints and date of transfer is the same. The administrative reasons so indicated in the transfer order is that complaint so atleast one fact finding enquiry was necessary which has not been undertaken by the competent authority. Therefore, for that reason alone, this transfer order suffers from perversity and illegality”.

The court allowed the writ petition and set aside the transfer order dated 30.06.2024. However, Justice Chauhan clarified that the competent authority retains the prerogative to pass appropriate transfer orders in accordance with government policy and law.

Also Read

• Pleadings in PIL Must Conform to General Rules of Pleadings: Supreme Court
• Perverse Finding By A Court Below Itself Amounts To A Substantial Question Of Law, Rules Delhi HC
• In Writ Appeal the Finding of the Enquiry Officer Cannot Be Interfered With Unless the Same Is Found to Be Perverse or Contrary: Chhattisgarh HC
• Prisoner’s constitutional rights persist even behind bars, says HC on lack of basic amenities in Tihar jail
• Andhra Pradesh High Court Explains Difference Between Tariff and Duty

Case Details:

1. Petitioner: Prakhar Saxena

2. Respondent: State of U.P. through Additional Chief Secretary, Department of Agriculture, Lucknow, and 3 others

3. Counsel for Petitioner: Syed Mohammad Haider Rizv, Ritika Singh, Tushar Mittal

4. Counsel for Respondent: C.S.C. (Chief Standing Counsel)