Power Of Transfer Exercised As Substitute For Infliction Of Lawful Punishment Is Malice In Law: Allahabad High Court

The Allahabad High Court has quashed an order for transfer of the petitioner by the Purvanchal Vidyut Vitaran Nigam Limited as being malicious and without justification. It was held that the transfer order cannot be used a measure for punishment.“The exercise of the power of transfer as a substitute for the infliction of lawful punishment in exercise of the employer's disciplinary jurisdiction, is verily an instance of malice in law,” held Justice J.J. Munir. Case Background Petitioner was an employee of the U.P. Power Corporation Limited, Lucknow since 2008. Posted at Gorakhpur Zone, he was transferred to Prayagraj (Prayagraj Region-II) on request by order dated 28.06.2024, as his wife was serving as Lecturer in a government institution. Subsequently, by order dated 30.06.2024, he was transferred to the Electricity Sub-Division, Katehara, Prayagraj.Four months afterward, the petitioner was transferred to Electricity Distribution Sub-Division-City, Pratapgarh. This order of transfer was challenged by the petitioner. High Court VerdictThe Court observed that the transferring authority in its counter affidavit stated that the petitioner was transferred to a place almost equidistant from his house in Prayagraj, so the transfer would not cause any difficulty. The Court stated that if this was the case, no interference would be warranted.However, the Court observed that as per the affidavit, there were several complaints against the petitioner, following which an inquiry was conducted against him. Examining the inquiry report, the Court noted that the impugned transfer order was passed on the same day as its submission. Such utilization of the power of transfer was held to be a measure of penalty.The Court observed that the fact that the petitioner did not respond to the Inquiry Committee's allegations was regarded as disrespectful behaviour and insubordination by higher officials, and led to the remark regarding need for improvement in petitioner's behaviour.Accordingly, the Court observed that the impugned transfer order was passed as a substitute for the exercise of disciplinary power by the transferring authority which was unjustified. Reliance was placed on Somesh Tiwari vs. Union of India and Others, where the Supreme Court observed that such a transfer order would be malice in law as it was not based on any factor germane for passing an order of transfer. Rather, it was based on irrelevant grounds, i.e., allegations made in complaints against the petitioner. It was observed that it is one thing to say that an order was passed on administrative exigency, and another thing entirely to pass it in lieu of punishment.Accordingly, the writ petition was allowed. It was directed that the petitioner may be permitted to join the station he was serving at prior to the order of transfer.Case Title: Vijay Kumar Yadav vs. State Of U.P. And 8 Others 2025 LiveLaw (AB) 19 [WRIT - A No. - 16814 of 2024]Case citation: 2025 LiveLaw (AB) 19Click Here To Read/Download Order

Power Of Transfer Exercised As Substitute For Infliction Of Lawful Punishment Is Malice In Law: Allahabad High Court

Upasna Agrawal

Tags