Facts
The petitioner was appointed as an Assistant Manager on a contract basis in the respondent-Federation (Stree Nidhi) in December 2019.
Source reference: p. 5After sustaining injuries in a bike accident and taking sanctioned medical leave, the petitioner sought to rejoin duties.
Source reference: p. 4Upon rejoining, the respondent-Federation issued proceedings on 22.03.2024 redeploying the petitioner to Wanaparthy District instead of his native Nagarkurnool District.
Source reference: p. 4The petitioner challenged this transfer, asserting it violated the HR Policy’s general conditions which stipulated that Assistant Managers should be posted within their native districts.
Source reference: p. 4-5The respondents contended that the Federation is a cooperative society not falling under the definition of "State" under Article 12, and that the petitioner’s 2024 contract specifically allowed for postings anywhere in the State due to administrative exigencies.
Source reference: p. 5-7Issues
1. Whether the respondent-Federation (Stree Nidhi Credit Cooperative Federation Ltd) constitutes "State" or "other authorities" under Article 12 of the Constitution of India, making the writ petition maintainable.
Source reference: p. 8 / para. 112. Whether the redeployment of the petitioner to a non-native district was contrary to the HR Policy and the terms of the employment contract.
Source reference: p. 13-14 / para. 18-21Law Applied
The court applied the functional and pervasive control test established in Ajay Hasia v. Khalid Mujib Sehravardi to determine if an entity is an instrumentality of the State.
Source reference: p. 8-9It relied on Zee Telefilms Ltd. v. Union of India, which identifies factors such as the discharge of public duties, governmental financial aid, and regulatory control as indicators of "State" status under Article 12.
Source reference: p. 9-11Regarding the transfer, the court looked to the contractual doctrine of consensus ad idem and the specific "Transfer Policy" clauses within the Federation’s HR Policy (Revised 2024).
Source reference: p. 14-16Reasoning
The court found the writ petition maintainable, noting that the State of Telangana holds a 7.3% share in the Federation, the Board includes six Government Nominee Directors (Senior IAS officers), and the Managing Director is appointed by the State.
Source reference: p. 11-12Furthermore, the Federation performs public duties—providing credit to Self-Help Groups as part of poverty alleviation programs—and its HR policy allows for mutual deputation with Government departments, indicating the Federation is an "other authority" under Article 12.
Source reference: p. 12-13On the merits of the transfer, the court observed that while the 2015 HR policy suggested native district postings for Assistant Managers, the revised 2024 policy and the specific contract signed by the petitioner on 19.03.2024 (Clause 6.11) explicitly stated he was "agreeable to work anywhere in the state as per exigencies".
Source reference: p. 15-16Consequently, the petitioner had no absolute legal right to a native district posting; however, the court noted that the respondents had the discretion to consider medical grounds.
Source reference: p. 16Holding
The court held that the respondent-Federation is an authority under Article 12 and the writ petition is maintainable.
On the merits, the court ruled that the petitioner is bound by the 2024 contract which permits pan-State transfers.
Source reference: p. 16The court disposed of the writ petition by directing the respondents to reconsider the petitioner's posting to Nagarkurnool on medical grounds within four weeks, without setting aside the impugned order as a matter of right.
Source reference: p. 17Original Court PDF
Nagapur RamuluvsThe State of Telangana
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in