om:32-cl-2020-Mar — The relief asked for by 8 Applicants who are working as JTO (S) under Ministry of Defence cannot question their transfer in normal course in Courts / Tribunals

The relief asked for by 8 Applicants who are working as JTO (S) under Ministry of Defence cannot question their transfer in normal course in Courts / Tribunals — This chunk is a part of the judgment where the Tribunal dismisses an Original Application (OA) filed by eight employees working as JTOs under the Ministry of Defence, challenging their transfer order... — Facts :There are 8 Applicants in this OA who are working as JTOs in Defence Production Department, Ministry of Defence. They are transferred to other stations in normal course. Against that transfer order, this OA is filed challenging the orders to set aside and retain them with their respective departments in the stations they are working.

Questioning transfer orders on various grounds by the employees is very common. This case is one of them. Hence only important points raised and the decision thereon is noted in this concise judgment.

At the outset, the Tribunal held that High Court and Apex Court limited the jurisdiction of a Court in intervening in transfer policy and transfer matters.

In the earlier OAs, the non-interference in transfer was adopted subject to the condition that transfer ordered is not against established rules.

Applicants herein only question their transfer orders and not the policy of rotational transfer. Employees aged 57 also do not come under rotational transfer. Analyzing the present challenge to the transfer of the Applicants is in strict confirmity with the policy which is upheld.

In general case, only Apex Court has inherent powers vested with it under Article 142 of the Constitution to interfere matters such as transfer, etc.

Quoting some earlier judgments of Full Bench of the Tribunal, it was said that the Tribunal is guided by law thereby it cannot travel into regions of equity alone and innovate remedies. This position is further elaborated in this judgment following decisions of other Courts and Apex Court.

Power under Article 142 of the Constitution is one which is wielded with circumspection and not in a manner which would defeat statutory intent, purpose and language. Para. 16 which is reproduced in the book titled "Judicial discretion (1989)" states as above.

In the present case, the rules have been issued under the proviso to Article 309 of the Constitution and have the force of statute. To interfere in this transfer by Tribunal is beyond the scope of Judicial review.

In the case of Ekta Shakti Foundation v. Government of NCT of Delhi [ 2006 (10) SCC 337 ] decided on 17-7-2006, it is said that "judicial enquiry is confined to question whether the decision taken by the Government is violative of Fundamental Rights of the citizens and opposed to provisions of the Constitution. Thus even if the decision of the Government is not agreeable to the Court, it cannot interfere".