Transfer and posting

  1. Transfer and posting is within the jurisdictional competence of the concerned authority — Courts cannot substitute their wisdom in such matters — Courts can intervene only if transfer and posting is made by the departmental authority in colourable exercise of jurisdiction in disregard of law and policy of the Government having the force of law. Muhammad Manzoor Khan v. The Secretary Education and 8 others 2004 SCR 305 (A)
  2. It is prerogative of the competent authority to pass an order of transfer and posting — No civil servant can claim his posting against any particular post or on a particular station as of his right — If a civil servant is posted against a post having lower grade, he shall be entitled to the same pay which he was drawing against the post from where he was transferred. Muhammad Maroof  v. Secretary Food & 2 others 2005 SCR 248 (A)
  3. Every civil servant is liable to serve anywhere within or outside AJ&K on any post under Government — No one can claim that he has a prerogative to serve on a particular post and at a particular station. Mirza Javaid Ahmed v. Anees Akram 2007 SCR 268 (A)
  4. 17 grade officers cannot be transferred against the post of grade 18 and a person holding grade 18 cannot be transferred to a post of substantive grade B-17. Abida Maqbool  v. Azad Govt. & others 2008 SCR 317 (A)
  5. Once a transfer order has been implemented, this Court does not interfere and regulate status quo. Abida Maqbool v.  Azad Govt. & others 2008 SCR 317 (B)
  6. Petitioner was assigned the charge of District Food Controller — There was no post of District Food Controller — When there was no post of District Food Controller no question arises regarding stopgap arrangement or promotion of any person — No appointment or transfer can be made unless there is a post — When there is no post then how the petitioner could be posted in District Bhimber — Held: The Service Tribunal has rightly held that when there is no post, then no question of promotion or posting as District Food Controller Bhimber arises. Muhammad Maroof v. Sardar Muhammad Tariq Khan & 3 others 2009 SCR 63 (A)
  7. The powers of posting and transfer assigned to the authorities doesn’t mean to exercise according to their sweet will or with malafide, either due to victimization, nepotism, favoritism or under any type of pressure, including political, social or trade unionism — The powers are vested for the purpose of achievement of good governance. Held: The powers of posting and transfer must be exercised in judicious manner. Mst. Sabia Aziz v. Director Technical Education & 5 others 2011 SCR 545 (C)
  8. Education Department — Transfer of civil servants — Most of cases are outcome of the desire of civil servants to be posted by transfer in urban areas — This permanent phenomenon of the education department requires special attention of the executive Authorities — The Court held it appropriate that a list of civil servants serving in urban areas indicating their period of stay must be prepared to meet the eventuality of adjustment within urban or municipal areas — The competent authorities must follow list according to the order of longest stay in the urban areas, while transferring from the urban or rural areas. Mst. Sabia Aziz    v. Director Technical Education & 5 others 2011 SCR 545 (F)
  9. Contention that appellant deserves to be posted at his home station, held no such provision under law is available which gives right to any civil servant to remain posted at his home station. Muzammil Hussain v. Javed Iqbal and 6 others 2014 SCR 991 (A) 2012 SCR 11, rel.
  10. The posting and transfer is a sole discretion of the departmental authority, but the same must be exercised in a judicious manner without violating the terms and conditions of the civil servants. In case of violation of any of the terms and conditions while exercising the discretion by the authority or involvement of political motivation, this Court always intervened. Muzammil Hussain v. Javed Iqbal and 6 others  2014 SCR 991 (B)
  11. It is not denied that transfer was not made on the recommendations of the Minister Food who does not figure anywhere in the matter relating to Education Department — held: proposal submitted by the unconcerned Minister is not a legal one.  Zareena Kausar v. Divisional Director Schools and 3 others 2014 SCR 878 (A)  2013 SCR 785, rel.
  12. The transfer/posting of an employee is sole prerogative of the Government, however the power enjoyed by the Govt. are required to be exercised within the parameters of law. Zareena Kausar v. Divisional Director Schools and 3 others 2014 SCR 878 (B)
  13. The transfer of a civil servant by political figures which are capricious and are based on the considerations not in the public interest are not legally sustainable. M. Ilyas Abbasi v. Azad Govt. & others 2015 SCR 1133 (F)
  14. The competent authority has power to pass a transfer order of a civil servant but such transfer order be passed fairly, justly, impartially, judiciously and shall not be passed arbitrarily, mala-fidely, motivated by political considerations and colourable exercise of the authority. Held: The transfer order which is politically motivated, in colourable exercise of the authority, passed without wisdom and good sense, is not a judicious order, such an order is arbitrary and fanciful, which is not maintainable. M. Ilyas Abbasi v. Azad Govt. 2015 SCR 1133 (G) PLD 2013 SC 195 rel. 
  15. If a Secretary to the Government refuses to comply with the illegal orders of the executive authority, he cannot be transferred as a punishment. M. Ilyas Abbasi v. Azad Govt. 2015 SCR 1133 (E)
  16. Adhoc Lecturers — policy notification — condition No. 3 — according to one of the conditions laid down in the policy, i.e. condition No. 3, it has been settled that the ad-hoc lecturers cannot be transferred from the place of their appointment to any other place. Saleem Ahmed v. AJ&K Govt. & others 2016 SCR 1249 (A)
  17.  Transfer — before the normal period of stay — Transfer in exigency of service — Normally, Supreme Court does not interfere with the orders passed by the competent authority in exigency of service — if the order seems to be illegal ab initio void, then Supreme Court always intervenes. In a number of pronouncements, it has constantly been held by the Supreme Court that normal tenure of stay at one place will not be less than three years.  The wisdom behind it is that a civil servant can perform his duties without any fear of successive transfers. However, Supreme Court does not debar the authority to pass the transfer order which the authority deems necessary in the exigency of the service even before the normal period of stay. Imtiaz Ghani v. Azad Govt. & 6 others 2016 SCR 1094 (A) 2005 SCMR 17 rel.
  18. Transfer before the completion of stay period — No bar to transfer a civil servant before the completion of the normal tenure — the transfer and posting is the sole prerogative of the Govt. — Held: power must be exercised judicially and not arbitrarily. Imtiaz Ghani v. Azad Govt. & 6 others 2016 SCR 1094 (C)
  19. Cancellation of — within a short span of time without assigning any reason — not maintainable — Held: This Court in a number of pronouncements has held that such practice of cancellation of the transfer orders within a short span of time without assigning any reason, on the face of it, is malpractice which cannot be approved. Muhammad Saeed Durani v. Azad Govt. & 7 others 2016 SCR 1741(A)  2015 SCR 968, rel.
  20. Successive transfer — not desireable — This Court has also disapproved the successive transfers in a number of judgments on the ground that the same create a fear of insecurity among the civil servants to perform their duties. M. Saeed Durani v. Azad Govt. 2016 SCR 1741 (B)  2015 SCR 1094, rel.
  21.  —of a newly appointed civil servant on his/her choice on a post by transferring an already serving civil servant—transfer of a civil servant—is to be justified in public interest—Held that the private respondent, who is a newly appointed candidate has not right for adjustment on her choice by transferring an already serving civil servant because transfer is to be justified in public interest. Shaheena Naseer v. Azad Govt. & 5 others 2020 SCR 384 (B)
  22. —transfer and posting of civil servants is the sole prerogative of authority—civil servant is obliged to serve anywhere he/she is posted—if a civil servant is transferred within a short span of time, the authority is bound to assign reason– Kalsoom Akhtar v. Shamim Akhtar & 3 others 2020 SCR 556 (A)
  23. —Transfer made just after a few days without assigning any reason—such practice of cancellation of transfer orders within a short span of time without assigning any reason, on the face of it, is a malpractice, which cannot be approved. Muhammad Ayub Abbasi & another v. Muhammad Hussain & others 2022 SCR 62 (A) 2015 SCR 968 ref
  24. — No one can claim the posting at a particular place as a matter of right— every civil servant is liable to serve anywhere within or outside AJ&K, provided that, where a civil servant is required to serve in a post outside his service or cadre, his terms and conditions of service as to pay shall not be less favourable than those to which he would have been entitled if he had not been so required to serve. Muhammad Ayub Abbasi & another v. Muhammad Hussain & others 2022 SCR 62 (C)
  25. —The transfer order has been acted upon and after 6 days of its implementation, the said order was kept in abeyance without assigning any reason—Estoppel by conduct. Fareed Ahmed v. DPI Education (Male) & others 2022 SCR 1420 (B) 2016 SCR 1207 rel.
  26. —Transfer & posting within the limitation of Municipal Corporation—does not fall within the definition of the transfer order. Fareed Ahmed v. DPI Education (Male) & others 2022 SCR 1420 (C) “Hammad Mushtaq Ahmed vs. Secretary Public Works Department and others” Civil PLA No. 9 of 2013, decided on 20.06.2013 rel.
  27. — Transfer of any Govt. servant can be made by theCompetent Authority in the exigency of service and keeping in view the public interest but at the same time, no Govt. servant has a legal right to remain posted at a particular place for indefinite period. If any transfer order is issued malafidly or on the motivation of political pressure, then the learned Service Tribunal is very much empowered to see the matter and decide the same in the given circumstances— there is no cavil with the proposition that if the order seems to be illegal and void then the learned Service Tribunal and Supreme Court have ample powers to intervene. Muhammad Pervaiz v. D.I.G Police & others  2022 SCR 1674 (A) 2016 SCR 1094 rel.
  28. — See Nighat Aara versus Azad Govt. & others 2023 SCR 729 (A)
  29.  b & — See Ch. Muhammad Shoukat versus Shehryar Aslam & others 2023 SCR 700 (B & C)
  30. — PSC employees — Transfer and posting of civil servants is the prerogative of concerned authority of the dept. and Govt., which are best to determine suitability of a civil servant for transfer and posting against any post(s) — Had there been a genuine observation of the High Court, a direction could have been issued to the authority or Govt. to probe into the matter for good governance — held: the transfer of employees of PSC to other dept. is contrary to departmental Service Rules. Muhammad Naeeem Iqbal & others versus Abdul Baseer Tajwer & others 2023 SCR 734 (B)
  31.  — Notification dated 30.12.2022 — transfer from CMH to AIMS vice versa — both institutions are situated within Municipal limits – held: the notification dated 30.12.2022 does not come within the purview of transfer notification, rather the same shall be deemed as an adjustment order. Dr. Aftab Ahmed vs Dr. Imran Khan & others 2024 SCR 229 (A&B) 2022 SCR 1420 rel.
error: Content is protected !!