Concept Of Equality Under Articles 14 & 16 Of Constitution Has No Application In Job Transfers: Madhya Pradesh HC
|The Madhya Pradesh High Court ruled that employers are best positioned to organize their workforce and that the principles of equality, as outlined in Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India, do not apply to job transfers.
The case involved an appellant who had been employed as an Assistant Engineer with the Madhya Pradesh Housing and Infrastructure Development Board since November 2011. She expressed dissatisfaction over her frequent transfers within the last two years, specifically her transfer from Division No. 2 in Gwalior to Division No. 1, along with an additional responsibility for Guna. Following her transfer, she filed a petition that led to directions for her representation to be considered. However, she later appealed against the subsequent order.
A Division Bench of Justice Anand Pathak and Justice Hirdesh, said, “Transfer is an incident of service. No one much less petitioner has any vested right to be posted at a particular place of posting. It is well settled in law that employer is the best judge to organize its work force and it is also well settled in law that a transfer order cannot be subjected to judicial review unless and until same is found to be influenced by mala fide or arbitrary exercise of powers which petitioner fails to do so. Concept of equality as enshrined under Articles 14 and 16 of Constitution of India, has no application to the cases of transfers.”
Advocate Kabir Qureshi appeared for the Appellant and Advocate A. K. Nirankari appeared for the respondents.
The Court noted that the appellant's representation had been duly considered and that both Divisions were located within the city of Gwalior and even in the same building. As such, the Court concluded that the appellant had no grounds to contest the decision, especially since her case had been adequately addressed by the department.
Consequently, the Court directed the appellant to report to Division No. 1 immediately if she had not already done so, and dismissed her appeal.
Cause Title: Neeru Rajput v. State of Madhya Pradesh & Ors., [2024:MPHC-GWL:17574]
Appearance:
Respondents: GA A.K. Nirankari, Advocate Pavan Kumar Dwivedi
Click here to read/download Order