RAJESH BAKSHI vs ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF INDIA on 22 October 2026

O R D E R

ahay Saksena, Administrative Membe n under Section 19 of the Administrative filed by the applicant. The facts of th nal Application (O.A.), are that the app photo officer in Archaeological Survey ing its office at 141 A/D, Green Belt Pa ce July 2023. The respondent No. 3 ovember, 2025 transferring the appl Aurangabad Circle with immediate effe nt was directed to relieve him within else the applicant will be deemed to etion of the said period and drawal of present place of posting. Further, the e order dated 01.12.2025 to enable him

g. The order also instructs the applica charge to Shri Hilal Ahmad Mir, Srinagar Circle within two months from and submit the charge report to the issued without ensuring completion release of statutory Transfer Travelling ensuring protection of salary, thereb financial vacuum and subjecting the a There is also an internal contradiction i of the said order dated 01.12.2025 w er) e Tribunals he case, as plicant has y of India, ark, Gandhi passed an licant from ect and the 15 days of have been f his salary respondent m to join his ant to hand Assistant the date of office. The n of charge g Allowance by creating applicant to n the order which make

POOJA SONI Location: POOJA SONI

this administratively been relieved from hi to discharge official r The respondent No. Last Pay Certificate the processing of sa granting a period of while simultaneousl absence of any impermissible in s governing pay, tran Despite the two rep respondents on 02. release of statutory were not decided till duty of the responde with regard to the absence of these fac be quashed, as was of Vishwajeet Singh

43. Further, the res applicant to the Au Accounts Office befor

::3 :: O.A.

y unworkable, as the applicant could is duty and at the same time expected t responsibilities for a further period of tw 4 further directed the Pay Section to p (LPC) of the applicant upto 30.11.20 alary with submission of charge repo two months for completion of charge ly relieving the applicant. This linka disciplinary proceedings or suspe ervice law and contrary to settled nsfers and relieving of Government presentations submitted by the applic 12.2025 seeking correction of relievin TA advance and protection of salary l the date of filing of the O.A. It was ents to mention in the transfer and po transfer allowance and other expense cts in the order will make this illegal an decided by the Rajasthan High Court v. State of Rajasthan reported as 201 spondents issued and forwarded the urangabad Circle and the concerned re joining of the applicant at Aurangaba d not have to continue wo months. prepare the 25, linking ort, despite formalities, age, in the ension, is principles t servants. cant to the ng process, , the same mandatory osting order es and the nd liable to in the case 17 (1) WLN LPC of the d Pay and ad.

POOJA SONI Location: POOJA SONI

1.1 Being aggrieve dated 28.11.2025 an the representation d approached this Trib

(a) allow the inst

(b) Quash the O issued by responde

(c) Quash the O 43/330/RB/Adm-23

(d) Prayer for gra be deemed approp case in favour of th

2. The case was admitting the case,h order dated 01.12.20 his present place of p

3. In their written the issue of transfer Apex Court and has established fact that the prerogative of th to get a particular should be passed in for any extraneous Courts and tribuna posting orders unles of jurisdiction, or p ::4 :: O.A.

ed by the aforesaid orders of the re nd 01.12.2025 and inaction of the resp dated 02.12.2025 of the applicant, the bunal seeking the following reliefs:- tant original application; Order No. 230/2025-Adm.I dated 2 ent no. 3; Order dated 1st December, 2025 be 79; ant of any other interim or final rel priate in the facts and circumstan he applicant.

listed on 10.12.2025 and this Tribu had stayed the implementation of th 025 allowing the applicant to continue posting, ASI, Srinagar Circle. n objections, the respondents have sub r and posting has been considered by t s been settled in a catena of decision t transfer is an essential condition of s he employer and an employee has no v posting as per his choice. The tran public interest or administrative exigen consideration or victimisation of the als will not interfere with routine tra ss there is a clear violation of statutory proven mala fides (malice in fact or espondents ondents on e applicant 28.11.2025 ing F. No. ief as may ces of the unal, while he relieving working at mitted that the Hon’ble ns. It is an service and vested right sfer orders ncy and not employee. ansfer and rules, lack r law). The

POOJA SONI Location: POOJA SONI

following cases wer respondents:-

(i) B. Varad (SC).

(ii) K. Siva Bank,19

(iii) Union of

(iv) Rajendra

(v) Jogendra

(vi) K.B. Shu

(vii) Union of

(viii) State of 244 (SC)

(ix) Shilpi Bo

(x) Jagdish WLC (Ra

(xi) State of 3.1 It was contend Government Gazett transfer/posting liab granted flexible time not later than two administrative proce deprive him of his liv done also) and the a after joining, the s posting. Further, abs a transfer illegal. Tr and service exigenci circle has been done way as Aurangabad ::5 :: O.A.

re cited in favour of their argumen dha Rao v. State of Karnataka, 1986 nkutty Nair v. Managing Director, 984 (2) SLR 13 (Kant) f India v. N.P. Thomas, 1993 Supp (1) S a Singh v. State of UP (2009) 15 SCC 17 a Mohanty v. State of Orissa, 1979 (1) S ukla v. Union of India, 1979 (2) SLR 58 f India v. S.L. Abbas AIR 1993 SC 2444 UP and Others v. Goverdhan Lal: 20 ) ose (Mrs.) and Ors. V. State of Bihar an Chandra Ojha v. State of Rajasthan aj.) 380 M.P. v. S.S. Kaurav (1995) 3 SCC 270 ded by the respondents, that the app ted officer and covered under an bility. It is also submitted that the app to hand over the charge as early as po months. The issuance of the LPC is ess and not a tool to victimise the ap velihood by withholding of salary (which applicant could avail joining time as pe alary could be disbursed at the new sence of a notified transfer policy does ransfers are guided by administrative ies. The transfer of the applicant to A e to utilise his experience and services d Circle has important world heritage nts by the 6(3) SLR60 Syndicate SCC 704 78 SLR 892 (SC) 004 (3) SLJ nd Ors. n: 1998 (3)

plicant is a n all-India plicant was ossible, but s a routine pplicant or h was never r rules and w place of not render e discretion Aurangabad in a better sites. The

POOJA SONI Location: POOJA SONI

personal and family administrative exigen and admissibility o availability of fund financial procedure. TA prior to issuance date, no funds wer However, the content without any financ Aurangabad Circle, allowance as due. Fu judgement in Vish distinguishable on fa factual and statutor principle applicable t

4. It is submitted in mention anywhere th service. The applican the basis of a com Tribunal by summon filed an MA No. 264 applicant remained l the Tribunal and wa contempt petition N order was passed b ::6 :: O.A.

circumstances of the applicants cann ncies and public interest. As regards e of TA, grant of advance of TA is ds, submission of request and obs The applicant did not request to grant a e of the relieving order. Further, as o re available under the concerned bu tion of the applicant that he was requir cial support is incorrect as upon re he would have received his salary an urther, the reliance placed by the applic hwajit Singh case (Supra) is misp acts, as the judgement was delivered in ry context and does not lay down a to transfer of Central Government empl n the rejoinder that the transfer orde hat the order was issued in the interes nt was transferred as a matter of puni plaint and this fact can be ascertain ning the office record for which the app 4/2026. It is further stated that the o locked even after passing of the Interim as opened by the respondents only on No. 719/2025 by the applicant. Furthe by the respondents on 04.02.2026 di not override entitlement subject to ervance of an advance on relevant udget head. red to travel eporting at nd other TA cant on the placed and n a different a universal loyees. er does not st of public ishment on ned by the plicant has office of the m Order by n filing the er, another recting the

POOJA SONI Location: POOJA SONI

applicant to handove Mir, Assistant Archa days from 28.11.202 disciplinary action u was passed in viol Tribunal. This forced bearing CP 79/202 statement that they shows the malafides the illegal and malafi

5. The responde 264/2026 stating tha the applicant, howev is averred that the t based on administra authority was obtain stigma or adverse co the same post, rank is purely speculativ admission, the appl transfer. Therefore, for adjudication of th order, an issue settle

6. During the co learned counsel for ::7 :: O.A.

er the charge of photo section to Mr. H aeologist, ASI, Srinagar Circle, Jammu 25 read with order date 01.12.2025 fa nder law shall be initiated against him. lation of the interim directions pass d the applicant to file another contem 26, following which the respondent would withdraw the order dated 04.02 of the respondents as they are keen to ide order of transfer. nts filed a response in reply to th at although a complaint has been receiv ver, no inquiry has been initiated in the transfer file was processed in the norm ative exigencies and the approval of the ned. The transfer does not impose an onsequence and the applicant continu and pay. The present application by th ve and exploratory in nature and b icant is seeking to “ascertain” the na presentation of the entire record is no he matter, which pertain to legality of t ed in service jurisprudence. urse of the arguments, it was submit r the applicant that the production

Hilal Ahmad u within 10 ailing which . This order sed by the mpt petition s made a .2026. This implement he MA No. ved against e matter. It mal course, competent ny penalty, ues to hold he applicant by his own ature of his ot essential the transfer tted by the of records

POOJA SONI Location: POOJA SONI

relating to the trans order was based on t as an instrument of decision of the Hon’b Union of India and founded on the irrele passed by way of or Therefore, examinati essential. The learne systematically exclud involving him in off and videographic se present. Further, the complaints from the non-functioning E-G cartridge. The applic a meaningful mann interim order of thi specific case law to hostile and discrimin similarly situated ind of or in lieu of punish by the courts. The ca

(i) Somesh Tiwari ::8 :: O.A.

sfer of the applicant will determine if t the complaint against the applicant and f punishment. It is further averred, ba ble Supreme Court in the case of Somes Ors., (2009) 2 SCC 592 that where a evant ground such as anonymous com in lieu of punishment, it is liable to be ion of substance behind the impugne ed counsel further averred that the re ded the applicant in performing his du ficial assignments and outsourcing ph ervices even when the applicant was e office infrastructure was not maintain applicant to rectify the malfunctioning Governance account ID and to replace ant should be permitted to discharge h ner and not be physically present bas is Tribunal. The learned counsel has argue that transfer made in malafide natory targeting of one employee out dividuals, irrelevant grounds and trans hment are the recognised grounds for i ase law cited is as follows:- i v. Union of India and Ors., (2009) 2 SC

the transfer d was used ased on the sh Tiwari v. transfer is mplaint or is e set aside. ed order is espondents uties by not hotographic physically ned despite g computer, the printer his duties in sed on the submitted manner or of multiple sfer by way nterference CC 592.

POOJA SONI Location: POOJA SONI

(ii) Gujarat Electr Poshani, (1989

(iii) The Manager, (1979) 1 SCC 4

(iv) T. Selvaraj v.D Finder (Madras

7. Rebutting the the learned Standing the applicant was do public interest and complaint. Hence, th dismissed as there is a particular post.

8. Heard the lea Standing Counsel ap the material placed o

9. The central i argument of the app on administrative gro punishment as a c constitutional jurispr has been enunciated judgments. Transfer incidents of service ::9 :: O.A.

ricity Board and Anr. V. Atmaram

9) 6 SCC 602. Government Branch Press v. D.B.

477. Director of School Education and Ors.

s) 2799}. arguments of the applicant, it was su g Counsel for the respondents that the one on the ground of administrative exig not in lieu of punishment on the he application filed by the applicant des s no inherent right of the applicant to b arned counsel for the applicant and t ppearing on behalf of the respondents a on record and that available in public do issue in the O.A. is the admissibil plicant that his transfer is flawed bein ounds, but as a punishment posting an complaint has been received against rudence of the service law on transfer a d by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in a r and posting of government servants governed by the fundamental legal

Sungomal Balliappa, {2010Law ubmitted by transfer of gencies and basis of a serves to be be posted at the learned nd perused omain. lity of the ng done not nd in lieu of t him. The and posting a catena of are normal principles

POOJA SONI Location: POOJA SONI

established by the S Hon’ble Supreme Cou Fundamental Legal  Incidence of government se have no bestow place of choice {Kendriya Vidy 2004 (12) SCC  Duty to Join transfer order pursuing litiga representation 2006 (9) SCC 5  Limited Judi interfere with r a clear violatio mala fides (ma 1991 Supp (2)  Guidelines vs or policies (su guide executi enforceable rig Abbas). ::10 :: O.A.

Supreme Court of India. The judgeme urt and the principles laid down are as Principles f Service: Transfer is an intrinsi ervice, and employees holding transfer wed right to remain posted at a specific

e. {Union of India v. S.L. Abbas, 1993 (4) yalaya Sangathan v. Damodar Prasa C 299}. n First: A government servant cann or skip reporting to the new place of po ation; they must first join and the n to the authorities {S.C. Saxena v. Unio 583}. icial Review: Courts and tribunals routine transfer and posting orders unle on of statutory rules, lack of jurisdiction alice in fact or law) (Shilpi Bose v. Sta SCC 659).

s. Enforceable Rights: Administrative uch as keeping spouses together) are ive discretion and do not confer ght upon an employee (Union of Ind ents of the follows. ic part of rable posts location or ) SCC 357}; ad Pandey, not flout a osting while en make a on of India, s will not ess there is n, or proven te of Bihar, guidelines e meant to a legally dia v. S.L.

POOJA SONI Location: POOJA SONI

 MLA Recomm of an MLA's u unless it is co mala fide (Sri Appeal No. 412  Family Hards from family or not grant a leg change that d staffing (Pratap arising out of S

10. The applicant punishment as a com also given the groun which is at a distan Jammu, particularly has to give competiti The applicant has a routinely and as a m three years, wherea Therefore, this tran coercive implementa justiciable and warr judgements and co transfer and posting ::11 :: O.A.

mendations: A transfer order initiated o nofficial (UO) note is not per se illegal ontrary to the statutory rules or is pr Pubi Lombi v. State of Arunachal Pra 29 of 2024). ships and Inter-District Claims: Dis r personal hardship is a universal issu gal right to claim an inter-district transf disrupts public interest or school/adm p Singh Baghel v. Akanksha Shukla [C SLP (C) No. 5678 of 2025]). t has argued that his transfer is mplaint was received against him. Furth nd of family difficulty in shifting to Ma nce of 1800 kms as his children are s y that his one child after passing the cla ive examination etc.This is seen as a pu also argued that there is no transfer matter of practice, an employee is trans as he has completed only two years sfer is discriminatory. The manner, t ation of the transfer order shows that rants judicial protection. However, ba onstitutional jurisprudence on servi g, it may be stated that the applicant h on the basis l or vitiated roven to be adesh, Civil splacement ue and does fer or cadre ministrative Civil Appeal in lieu of her, he has aharashtra, studying in ass 12th etc. unishment. policy, but ferred after of service. timing and it is legally sed on the ice law of has failed to

POOJA SONI Location: POOJA SONI

show if the transfer vitiated by malafides in lieu of punishmen him is also unprove Government employ under Central Civil Services (Classificati that. However, since proceedings contem show cause notice speculative ground administrative act exigencies and in pu respondents. This T discretion to questi violation or malafid applicant is posted prejudiced by an a Therefore, the O.A. c

11. In view of the not be quashed, as malafide manner. H inconsistent and unw both immediate reli records and handing ::12 :: O.A.

r order is against any statutory prov

s. Mere averment that the transfer orde nt for a complaint which has been receiv en. If there is any complaint received yee, there is a standard procedure Services (Conduct) Rules, 1964 and C ion, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1965 t no inquiry has been initiated and no d mplated against him under these Rul issued to him, it clearly shows that and not proved. Further, trans and is done on the basis of adm ublic interest. This point has been m Tribunal can not question or substitu ion this act of transfer unless some des is demonstrated and proved. Fu to the same post, scale and pay and act of transfer, so, this is not a pu can not succeed. above, the transfer order dated 28.1 s it is not legally unsustainable or is owever, the order dated 01.12.2025 is workable and deserves to be set aside, ieving of the official, but permits re g over the same to the officer concerned vision or is er is issued ved against d against a prescribed entral Civil o deal with disciplinary les and no t this is a fer is an ministrative made by the ute its own e statutory urther, the will not be unishment. 1.2025 can ssued in a s internally as it allows etention of d during the

POOJA SONI Location: POOJA SONI

next two months, im maintenance of reco impossible for an em maintain and protec vacated by him. W instrumentalities are 1800 kms at Aura maintenance of reco inconceivable and in has become otiose a mandated. Normally, new charge happens day, if both the post case, since the two should be possible Therefore, the joinin that relieving from th happen seamlessly a travel and waste of order dated 01.12.20 happen in the next note that the respon

(xii) } that on the re budget head for gran part of the responden ::13 :: O.A.

mplying continuing control and respo ords on the part of the applicant. It i mployee to be relieved of his post, but c ct custody of record of the post which What is the wherewithal and wha e available to an employee placed at a angabad to have control and respon ord at Jammu is anybody’s guess. It nherently unworkable and impractical. as it has not been implemented over th , handing over of old charge and taking s seamlessly either on the same day o ts are in the same place. However, in t o posts are quite distant from each after accounting for the travel or joi g at the new post should be effected in he current post and joining at the new p and not with such interruptions and u resources as allowed in the second p 025, which said that handing over of two months after relieving. This is im ndents have admitted in their objectio elevant date, no funds were available nt of TA advance. Therefore, it is not r nts, while defending the para 2 of the o onsibility of s well-nigh continue to h has been at kind of distance of nsibility of t is simply However, it he period as g over of the or the next the present other, this ining time. n a manner post should nnecessary para of the record can mportant to ons {para 5 under the right on the order dated

POOJA SONI Location: POOJA SONI

01.12.2025, to state the facility of official and this is just an a funds were not availa first place to go on respondents will tak order.

12. Thus, this Trib the transfer order sustained. However, dated 01.12.2025 is this order so that th new charge can happ and fair manner.

13. The Interim Or

14. No order as to (Pragya Sahay Administrative

Poojasoni…

::14 :: O.A.

that the applicant was given the liberty l tour to come to Jammu to hand over afterthought and administratively expen able to grant a TA advance to the appli transfer to Aurangabad. It is expecte ke care of this deficiency in the revise bunal does not find any reason to int dated 28.11.2025 and therefore tha partially allowing the O.A., the Governm quashed. The respondents are directe he handing over of old charge and tak pen seamlessly and in an administrativ rder of this Tribunal dated 10.12.2025 i costs. Saksena)

(Sanjeev G e Member

Judicial M

y to avail of the charge nsive when icant in the ed that the ed relieving terfere with at order is ment Order ed to revise king over of ely efficient is vacated.

Gupta) Member

POOJA SONI Location: POOJA SONI