Employer not required to assign reason for transferring staffer: High Court

Saurabh Malik
Tribune News Service
Chandigarh, May 11

An employer is not required to justify or assign reason for transferring an employee from one place to another, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has made it clear. The assertion came as the Bench refused to interfere with the transfer of a police official following High Court orders against posting cops in districts where they were being tried in criminal cases.

The ruling by Justice Suvir Sehgal came on a petition by a police official against the state of Punjab and other respondents. He was seeking the quashing of an impugned order dated April 20 transferring him from Ludhiana (rural) to Khanna.

The petitioner’s counsel submitted the impugned transfer order was passed in compliance with interim order dated March 15 by the High Court, whereby it was directed that no police officer would be posted in any district, where he was being tried in a criminal case.

The counsel contended that the petitioner-police official was named as an accused in an FIR lodged on January 3, 2020, for wrongful restraint, rash driving and other offences under Sections 341, 323, 279 and 427 of the IPC at Jagraon city police station in Ludhiana (Rural) district. He was yet to face trial as even the challan had not been presented.

The counsel added, in any case, there was an amicable settlement. A panchayati compromise was arrived at and the “FIR stood settled”. He added the petitioner’s parents were suffering from age-related ailments. His father, a heart patient, was taking treatment from Ludhiana DMC and his transfer would result in hardship.

Justice Sehgal added an employee’s transfer was a part of the service conditions and an incidence of service. “An employee cannot insist that once appointed or posted at a particular place, he should continue at the same place as long as he desires,” Justice Sehgal added. Justice Sehgal observed the petitioner had been serving at the same station for the last more than nine years. He was transferred to Khanna, barely 40 km from his place of present posting. “Therefore, his argument that the transfer will result in a hardship is a fallacy. There is no allegation of mala fide against any official nor is it the argument of the counsel for the petitioner that the service rules prohibit such a transfer,” Justice Sehgal concluded.