In a significant judgment, the Allahabad High Court ruled that employee transfers should not compromise their seniority within their cadre. The decision came in response to multiple writ petitions filed by employees of Purvanchal Vidyut Vitaran Nigam Ltd, a subsidiary of the Uttar Pradesh Power Corporation Ltd (UPPCL), challenging their transfer orders issued on June 28, 2024. The court emphasized that while transfers are an administrative necessity, they should not disrupt the established seniority within an employee’s cadre, thereby preserving the integrity of the cadre-based seniority system.
Background of the Case
The primary case, Writ – A No. 10189 of 2024, titled Anupam Srivastava and 7 Others vs. Uttar Pradesh Power Corporation Ltd and Others, was reserved on July 23, 2024, and delivered on August 20, 2024. The judgment was rendered by Justice Ajit Kumar. Petitioners in the case were represented by Senior Advocate Anoop Trivedi, assisted by Vikas Upadhyay, among others, while the respondents were represented by Abhishek Srivastava, Devesh Vikram, and Manoj Kumar Srivastava.
The petitioners included Anupam Srivastava, Sanjay Kumar Pandey, Ugrasen Singh, Nitin Narayan Srivastava, Abhishek Gupta, Hitesh Bhatnagar, Ranjeet Kumar Yadav, and Ram Prakash, all serving as Executive Assistants in various zones under the Purvanchal Vidyut Vitaran Nigam Ltd. They challenged their transfers to different zones and districts on the grounds that these moves would adversely impact their seniority and career progression.
The case was heard alongside connected petitions, including:
– Writ – A No. 9702 of 2024 (Rahul Kumar vs. State of U.P. and Others), represented by Narendra Deo Upadhyay, Rahul Agarwal, and Vinay Bhushan Upadhyay.
– Writ – A No. 10495 of 2024 (Ganga Prasad Jaiswal vs. State of U.P. and Others), represented by Shivam Shukla and Vinod Kumar.
– Writ – A No. 10096 of 2024 (Arun Kumar Singh vs. State of U.P. and Others), represented by Prabhakar Awasthi and Saurabh Tripathi.
Legal Issues Involved
The petitioners raised several key legal issues:
1. Validity of the Transfer Policy: The petitioners contended that the transfer policy of 2019-2020, which was an annual policy, was no longer in effect, and the corporation could not re-enforce it through a circular dated July 22, 2023, without proper statutory backing.
2. Service Conditions Under the U.P. Electricity Reforms Transfer Scheme, 2000: The petitioners argued that according to the scheme, the UPPCL was required to frame statutory rules governing transfers, failing which the old U.P. State Electricity Board rules should apply. They challenged the enforceability of the transfer policy based on circulars rather than statutory regulations.
3. Impact on Seniority and Administrative Hierarchy: A major concern was that the transfers could disrupt the seniority hierarchy within the cadre, as employees were transferred to posts where juniors were holding higher ranks due to different administrative setups in various circles.
Court’s Decision and Key Observations
The Allahabad High Court, after hearing the arguments, ruled in favor of protecting the seniority of employees within their cadre, regardless of transfers between different circles or zones. Key observations of the court included:
– Preservation of Seniority: The court stated that “transfers should not be made in such a manner that compromises the seniority of employees within their cadre.” The court noted that ensuring the maintenance of cadre-based seniority is crucial for the integrity of service conditions and for preventing arbitrary administrative decisions.
– Transfer as an Incident of Service: The court reaffirmed the principle that transfer is an inherent aspect of public service but emphasized that it must not disrupt established seniority or place employees in subordinate roles under their juniors.
– Need for a Uniform Policy: The court urged the UPPCL to develop a comprehensive DISCOM-based cadre and seniority list to streamline transfers and minimize grievances. It suggested that appropriate regulations be framed to establish a clear policy governing the transfers and seniority of employees within the various DISCOMs under the UPPCL.
– Future Directions: The court directed that the UPPCL and its subsidiaries ensure that no employee is transferred to a position that is hierarchically inferior to their previous post, thus preserving their cadre seniority. It also recommended that employees aggrieved by their transfer orders first comply with their postings and then make representations to the competent authority for redressal.
