Supreme Court: Borrowers Retain Redemption Rights if Balance is Paid After Auction Deadline  ||  Supreme Court: Non-Confirmation of Seizure under Section 37A Impacts Adjudication Proceedings  ||  SC: Blacklisting After Contract Termination is Not Automatic and Needs Independent Review  ||  Grand Venice Fraud Case: Supreme Court Cancels Bail of Satinder Singh Bhasin  ||  SC: Senior Employee Cannot Claim Same Lesser Penalty As Subordinate; Bank Manager's Dismissal Upheld  ||  Madras HC: Governor Must Follow Cabinet's Advice on Remission Decisions, Regardless of Personal View  ||  Kerala High Court: Entrepreneurs Must Be Protected From Baseless Protests to Boost Industrial Growth  ||  J&K&L High Court: Second FIR Valid if it Reveals a Broader Conspiracy; 'Test of Sameness' is Key  ||  Supreme Court: Expecting a Minor to Respond to a Public Court Notice is ‘Perverse’  ||  SC: Order 23 Rule 1 CPC Applies to S. 11 Arbitration Act, Barring Fresh Arbiration After Abandonment    

Ct/Gd Rajender Singh vs. Union Of India &Ors. (Neutral Citation: 2024:DHC:314-DB) - (High Court of Delhi) (16 Jan 2024)

Transfer is an exigency of service which ought not to be interfered by a Court of law, especially, when it is pertaining to Armed Forces

MANU/DE/0303/2024

Service

The Applicant/ Petitioner, serving as a Constable in Sashastra Seema Bal [SSB] filed a writ petition challenging his transfer from New Delhi to Siddharth Nagar, Uttar Pradesh before present Court. The same was disposed of vide order and the petitioner was to make a representation for consideration before the concerned authorities.

Thereafter, the Petitioner filed the present writ petition seeking quashing of the order whereby he was transferred to 4th Battalion, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh from 43rd Battalion, Siddharth Nagaras also the subsequent order rejecting his representation.

Prima facie, the present application is not maintainable as the writ petition has already been disposed of and the Petitioner has not assailed the subsequent order passed thereafter, which is a fresh cause of action.Even otherwise, the Petitioner has admittedly not alleged any bias or mala fide, vindictiveness on the part of the respondents or that there is any violation of any statutory requirements, rules, regulations.Moreover, the Petitioner has been unable to show as to what are the medical facilities required, which are exclusively available in Delhi and are not available in a city like Lucknow.

As per settled law, transfer is an exigency of service which ought not to be interfered by a Court of law, especially, when it is pertaining to Armed Forces, as they are the best judges who exercise their discretion and form an opinion thereon.

Accordingly, in view of the existing facts involved coupled with the settled position of law, the present application is dismissed.

Tags : TRANSFER   LEGALITY  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2026 - All Rights Reserved