UNION OF INDIA & ORS.versusH.N. KIRTANIA

                          UNION OF INDIA & ORS.
                                                                                  A
                                    v.
                              H.N. KIRTANIA

                                  JULY 12, 1989

                      [K.N. SINGH AND M.H. KANIA, JJ.]                            B

          Civil Services-Transfer of public servant-Administrative
     Tribunal upholding order-Directions regarding release order and pay-

-~   ment of emoluments-Validity of
                  r
           The respondent, a Central Government officer was transferred
     from Calcutta to Jaipur by an order dated 14th March, 1985 and
                                                                                  c
     relieved of his duty the next day. He, however, tiled a writ petition
     before the High Court and obtained an interim injunction.

           The writ petition was subsequently transferred to the Central
     Administrative Tribunal, which held that the order of transfer was not       D
     ma/a fide or unfair, and there was no ground for interfering with it. It,
     however, directed the appellants to pay all arrears of salary with
     allowances to the respondent and not to issue the release order unless all
     his emoluments were paid.

           Allowing the appeal,                                                   E

          HELD: The Tribunal having recorded positive findings that the
     transfer order was legal and valid and it was not vitiated by any unfair-
     ness or ma/a fide, should have dismissed the writ petition. It had no
     jurisdiction to issue further directions regarding the release order and
     the payment of emoluments. [398H]                                            F

           The respondent had already been relieved from the Calcutta
     office with effect from 15th March, 1985. Therefore, there was no
     question of issuing any fresh release order. [399A]

           CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 2942                    G
     of 1989.

          From the Judgment and Order dated 30.11.1987 of the Calcutta
     Central Administrative Tribunal Court in T.A. No. 452'of 1987/C.0.
     6078-W. of 1985.
                                                                                  H
                                         397
    398                    SUPREME COURT REPORTS            [1989] 3 S.C.R.

A         G. Ramaswamy, Additional Solicitor General, T. C. Sharma and         y·-'
    C. V. Subba Rao for the Appellants.

          Girish Chandra for the Respondents.

          The following Order of the Court was delivered:
B
                                    ORDER

          Leave granted.

        This appeal is directed against the order of the Central
    Administrative Tribunal, Calcutta, dated November 30, 1987.
c
          The respondent was posted as Public Relations Officer in the
   Regional Passport Office, Calcutta. He was transferred from Calcutta
   to Jaipur under the order dted 14.3.1985, and he was relieved of his
   duty from Regional Passport Office, Calcutta w.e.f. 15.3.1985 with the
L) direction to report for duty at Jaipur. The respondent instead of join-
   ing at Jaipur filed a writ re ti ti on before the Calcutta High Court and
   obtained interim injunction. Later on contempt proceedings were
   initiated by the respondent against the appellants and the High Court
   passed an order dated 11.10.1985 directing the appellants to allow the
   respondent to join at Calcutta office and to pay all arrears of salary to
E him. A number of orders were passed by the High Court in respon-
   dent's favour but all those orders have been set aside by this Court in
   Civil Appeals arising out of Special Leave Petitions Nos. 6835 to 6837
   of 1986. The respondent's writ petition pending before the Calcutta            ..
   High Court was subsequently transferred to the Central Administra-
   tive Tribunal, Calcutta Bench. The Tribunal by its order dated
F November 30, 1987 disposed of the writ petition. The Tribunal held
   that the order of transfer was not mala fide or unfair, and there was no
   ground for inter!ering with the transfer order. After recording that
   finding the Tribunal directed the appellants to pay all arrears of salary
   with allowances to the respondent with a further direction that no
   release order shoulJ be issued to the respondent unless all his emolu-
G ments are paid to him.

          After hearing learn~d counsel for the parties we find that the
    Tribunal acted in excess of its jurisdiction in issuing impugned direc-
    tion. The Tribunal recorded positive findings that the transfer order
    was legal and valid and it was not vitiated by any unfairness, or mala
!if fide, thereupon it should have dismissed the writ petition. It had no
                            U.0.1. v. H.N. KIRTANIA                     399

    jurisdiction to issue further directions regarding the release order and   A
    the payment of emoiuments. The Tribunal lost sight of the fact that
    the respondent had already been released from the Calcutta office
    w.e.f. 15.3.1985, therefore, there was no question of issuing any fresh
    release order. We accordingly allow the appeal and set aside the
    impugned directions of the Tribunal. There will be no order as to
    costs.                                                                     B

    P.S.S.                                                 Appeal aHowed.


}