Chief Minister's Office recommendations for employee transfers are advisory, not binding orders.

The appellant, Sri Chethan S, an Assistant Engineer (Ele) (Whitefield O&M Unit, BESCOM), filed a writ appeal challenging the judgment and order dated 09.09.2024 passed by a Single Judge in W.P.No.21759/2024 (S-RES)

The Single Judge's order included observations in paragraphs 22 and 23 regarding the Office of the Hon'ble Chief Minister issuing letters/orders/approvals for transfers of Group 'B' or 'C' employees, thereby overriding orders issued by official superiors

The Single Judge noted that the petitioner (appellant herein) had obtained approval from the Chief Minister's office for a mutual transfer that did not emanate from the respondent Nos. 1 and 2, which protracted his transfer from 2022 to 2024

The High Court had previously granted an interim status quo order on 15.12.2025 regarding the appellant's posting and transfer until the next transfer season commencing in April

In compliance with an order dated 24.02.2026, the Chief Secretary of the State filed an affidavit on 03.03.2026, stating that notes from the Chief Minister's Office are only recommendatory and not transfer orders

The affidavit further clarified that such recommendations are scrutinized by concerned departments based on Cadre and Recruitment Rules and General Transfer Guidelines

The Chief Secretary also confirmed that the observations made by the Single Judge were brought to the attention of the Chief Minister, and concerned staff were sensitised

The court primarily applied the principle that transfers and postings of employees should be managed by concerned administrative departments, not by the highest authority of the State

It reiterated that recommendations from high offices, such as the Chief Minister's Office, are advisory and subject to scrutiny under established Cadre and Recruitment Rules and General Transfer Guidelines issued by the Department of Personnel and Administrative Reforms (DPAR)

The court underscored the importance of competent authorities within administrative departments making transfer decisions based on defined rules and policies

The Court disposed of the appeal by first acknowledging the upcoming end of the current transfer season in March and the commencement of a new one in April

It directed that the appellant's current posting remains undisturbed until a fresh transfer order is issued in the next session, allowing respondents liberty to effect transfers as per rules

Regarding the Single Judge's observations, the Court noted the Chief Secretary's affidavit, which clarified that notes from the Chief Minister's Office are recommendatory, not binding transfer orders, and that such recommendations are to be scrutinized by departments per established rules

The Court agreed with the Single Judge's concerns, stating that transfers should be handled by administrative departments to prevent the highest authority from expending time on such matters and to avoid interference with departmental decisions

It emphasized that the Chief Minister has more critical duties than intervening in employee transfers and postings

It directed that the appellant's current place of posting shall not be disturbed until the next session of transfer or a fresh order of transfer is issued, while allowing the respondents to effect transfers in accordance with Transfer Rules and Policy thereafter

The Court upheld the spirit of the Single Judge's observations, concluding that no request for transfer and posting should be entertained directly by the Office of the Hon'ble Chief Minister, and that such matters should be resolved at the departmental level

The Court directed that a copy of its order be placed before the Hon'ble Chief Minister for necessary directions to his office