Full Judgment Text
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 1
PETITIONER:
DIRECTOR OF SCHOOL EDUCATION MADRAS AND OTHERS
Vs.
RESPONDENT:
O. KARUPPA THEVAN
DATE OF JUDGMENT31/01/1994
BENCH:
SAWANT, P.B.
BENCH:
SAWANT, P.B.
SINGH N.P. (J)
CITATION:
1994 SCC Supl. (2) 666
ACT:
HEADNOTE:
JUDGMENT:
ORDER
1. Leave granted. Heard both counsel.
2. The tribunal has erred in law in holding that the
respondent employee ought to have been heard before
transfer. No law requires an employee to be heard before
his transfer when the authorities make the transfer for the
exigencies of administration. However, the learned counsel
for the respondent, contended that in view of the fact that
respondent’s children are studying in school, the transfer
should not have been effected during mid-academic term.
Although there is no such rule, we are of the view that in
effecting transfer, the fact that the children of an
employee are studying should be given due weight, if the
exigencies of the service are not urgent. The learned
counsel appearing for the appellant was unable to point out
that there was such urgency in the present case that the
employee could not have been accommodated till the end of
the current academic year. We, therefore, while setting
aside the impugned order of the Tribunal, direct that the
appellant should not effect the transfer till the end of the
current academic year. The appeal is allowed accordingly
with no order as to costs.
668