transfer is an incidence of service and the employee has no legal right in this behalf

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATHISH NINAN
MONDAY, THE 6TH DAY OF MARCH 2023 / 15TH PHALGUNA, 1944
WP(C) NO. 6561 OF 2023
PETITIONER:
SMT. NIXY JAMES,
W/O. SIBY PHILIP, SUPERINTENDENT, THE KERALA STATE ROAD
TRANSPORT CORPORATION, DISTRICT OFFICE, THRISSUR,
PIN - 680001 (NOW UNDER ORDERS OF TRANSFER TO THALASSERY UNIT
OFFICE) RESIDING AT NELLIKKUNNATH HOUSE, CHIYYARAM.P.O.,
THRISSUR, PIN - 680026
BY ADV O.D.SIVADAS
RESPONDENTS:
1 THE KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION
TRANSPORT BHAVAN, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN  695001
REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR.

6. Law is too well settled that, transfer is an
incidence of service and the employee has no legal right
in this behalf. It is also well settled that, unless the
orders of transfer is vitiated by statutory violations
or mala fides, Courts should be loathe in interfering
with the same. Courts will be extremely circumspect,
will act with restraint and may not ponder into
hairsplitting arguments, to scan the decisions in orders
of transfer. The Corporation cannot effectually work
when the employees act intolerably or spitefully amongst
themselves or is engaged in activities which go against
the best interests of the Corporation. Transfer can be
effected on administrative grounds as long as it is
W.P.(C) 6561 & 6786 of 2023
-: 4 :-
intended to aid proper administration and to subserve
internal discipline.
7. When an employee is transferred to maintain the
smooth running of an organization, it is not to be
understood as a punishment. The element of punishment is
absent therein. The idea is to maintain the internal
harmony of the organisation and to safeguard its smooth
functioning. In every case of erratic or inappropriate
behaviour by a subordinate, the employer is not bound to
initiate departmental action and to impose punishment.
For effecting a transfer, there need not be any enquiry
conducted to first ascertain whether there was
misbehaviour or conduct unbecoming of an employee. To
hold otherwise would frustrate the very purpose of
transferring an employee in public interest or
exigencies of administration, to enforce a decorum and
ensure probity.
8. The question whether an employee is to be
transferred to a different division etc. are matters for
W.P.(C) 6561 & 6786 of 2023
-: 5 :-
the employer to consider depending upon the
administrative necessities. The power to transfer an
employee in a transferable service is within the
prerogative of the employer. It is he who knows best,
where an employee should be deployed for an effective
discharge of his/her duties for the establishment. The
inconvenience caused to the employee and his family
consequent on the transfer are not sufficient to
interfere with the orders of transfer. A transfer can
always be done in public interest. (Babu v. State of Kerala
1988 (2) KLT 258, Vasu v. High Court of Kerala 1989 (1) KLT 16,
Dinamony v. Dt. Superintendent of Police, Kollam 1994 (1) KLT 326, P.
Pushpakaran v. Chairman, Coir Board (Ker.) 1979 (1) SLR 309, Rajan v.
Director General of Police 1999 (2) KLT 673, Shilpi Bose v. State of
Bihar 1991 Supp. (2) SCC 659, Union of India v. S. L. Abbas 1993 (4)
SCC 357, National Hydroelectric Power Corporation Ltd. v. Shri
Bhagwan 2001 8 SCC 574, Union of India and Others v. Sri Janardhan
Debanath and Another 2004 (4) SCC 245, Divyamol R. S. v. Director
W.P.(C) 6561 & 6786 of 2023
-: 6 :-
General Central Industrial Security Force, New Delhi and Others 2022 (5)
KHC 732).
9. In addition to the law on transfers as noticed
supra, it is appropriate to refer to clause 11 of the
Transfer Guidelines in Appendix-IV of the Long-Term
Settlement Agreement, 2012 of the Corporation. A copy of
the same has been produced along with the counter
affidavit as Annexure-R1(a). Clause 11 thereof deals
with Transfer on Administrative ground due to disciplinary issues.
Therefore, the Corporation is enabled even under the
Transfer Guidelines to effect transfers of its employees
on administrative grounds, to maintain a harmonious and
working atmosphere at its offices.
10. In the case at hand, from the report of the
Executive Director (Vigilance), the authorities were
satisfied that there is disharmony in the office caused
at the instance of the persons who are under orders of
transfer in Ext.P1, including the petitioners. It was
noticed that the smooth functioning of the office is
W.P.(C) 6561 & 6786 of 2023
-: 7 :-
affected. It is taking note of such circumstances that
Ext.P1 transfer order has been issued.
 11. There is no material to infer malice or
malafides on the part of the authority, much less is
there any such allegation. The orders of transfer
warrant no interference.
Resultantly, the writ petitions are dismissed.
Sd/-
 SATHISH NINAN
 JUDGE