WP (C) 1208 of 2016. Case: Manoj Kumar Ghosh Vs Union of India and Ors.. Tripura High Court

Case NumberWP (C) 1208 of 2016
Party NameManoj Kumar Ghosh Vs Union of India and Ors.
CounselFor Appellant: R. Guha, Advocate and For Respondents: D.K. Biswas, Advocate and Biswanath Majumder, CGC
JudgesS. Talapatra, J.
IssueService Law
Judgement DateJanuary 13, 2017
CourtTripura High Court

Judgment:

S. Talapatra, J., (At Agartala)

  1. By means of this writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the office order No. 106/order/2016-Estt. dated 10.10.2016 [Annexure P/6 to the writ petition] whereby the petitioner has been transferred, in suppression of the office order No. 106/order/2016-Estt. dated 11.07.2016, from the BCDI, Agartala to the National Centre for Design and Product Development, Hall No. 1, 3rd Floor, Rajiv Gandhi Handicraft Bhawan, Baba Kharak Singh Marg, Connaught Place, New Delhi-10001. The petitioner has also been released from the BCDI, Agartala with effect from 20.10.2016 [Afternoon] with a direction to report for the duty as National Centre for Design and Product Development, ('NCDPD' in short) at New Delhi. Even his travelling allowances has been allowed for purpose of enabling him [the petitioner] to join the new place of posting. Earlier by the office order No. 106/order/2016-Estt. dated 11.07.2016, the petitioner was transferred from BCDI, Agartala, to Integrated Design and Technical Development Project in Jute Craft Jajori, Nagaon (Assam). But the petitioner by filing the writ petition being WP(C) No. 802 of 2016 had challenged the said order on several grounds. By the judgment and order dated 16.09.2016 [Annexure P/12 to the writ petition] this court had interfered with the said transfer order with the observation that the transfer is an incidence of service and the National Centre for Design and Product Development (NCDPD) shall remain within its authority to transfer the petitioner in terms of law, in a post which is not inferior to the post presently held by the petitioner. The said judgment and order has remained unchallenged and it has reached its finality. As it appears that the present office order dated 10.10.2016 [Annexure P/6 to the writ petition] is an outcome of fresh exercise and now the National Centre for Design and Product Development has passed the said office order in the said exercise. The petitioner has raised the similar objection that the transfer order has not been issued by the "competent authority", despite the above observation in the earlier writ petition. That apart, the petitioner has raised a fresh issue that earlier the respondents had stated that unless the petitioner is transferred to the Integrated Design and Technical Development Project in Jute Craft Jajori, Nagaon, Assam, the programme in the said development project would suffer a huge setback but now the petitioner has been transferred to the NCDPD, New Delhi. This fact itself, according to the petitioner, shows that the object of the respondents particularly the respondent No. 4 is to somehow remove the petitioner from the BCDI at Agartala. Ex-facie, such act is malicious and colourable exercise of power.

  2. Ms. R. Guha, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, in support of her contention as referred above, has submitted that in Para 21 of the writ petition the petitioner has asserted the above fact. Moreover the petitioner has asserted that...

To continue reading

Request your trial