The Orissa High Court has ruled that employees do not have a vested right to choose their place of posting or job designation. The court emphasized that such decisions are solely at the discretion of the employer, considering public interest and administrative needs.
Court’s Decision
A Division Bench comprising Justice Sangam Kumar Sahoo and Justice Savitri Ratho dismissed a petition challenging the decision of the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT), Cuttack. The court reaffirmed that posting is a part of service conditions and that an employer has the exclusive right to decide where an employee should be posted.
Case Background
The petitioner, who was appointed as an Off-set Machine Assistant in the Postal Printing Press (PPP), Bhubaneswar, was affected when the government decided to close the press in May 2018. Employees were given options to choose their preferred place of posting, and the petitioner requested a transfer to the Circle Office, Bhubaneswar.
However, while eight other employees were sent for training and absorbed in different departments, and seven employees were retained in PPP, Bhubaneswar, the petitioner was assigned as a Multi-Tasking Staff (MTS) in RMS ‘N’ Division. He later challenged this decision, arguing that other employees with equal or lesser qualifications were given better postings.
The Department of Posts rejected his request, stating that he lacked the required administrative knowledge for a Postal Assistant position at the Circle Office. He then approached the Central Administrative Tribunal, which upheld the department’s decision. Following this, he filed a writ petition before the Orissa High Court.
Court’s Observations
The High Court upheld the Central Administrative Tribunal’s decision, stating that:
- Employees cannot demand a specific posting since transferable jobs do not grant a right to a particular location.
- The employer has full authority to decide postings based on public interest and administrative needs.
- The Supreme Court’s rulings in Shilpi Bose v. State of Bihar and State of U.P. v. Gobardhan Lal were cited, reinforcing that transfer orders cannot be interfered with unless proven to be illegal, malafide, or beyond the authority of the employer.
Final Verdict
The Orissa High Court dismissed the petition, ruling that the tribunal’s decision was justified and did not warrant interference. The judgment strengthens the principle that government employees cannot demand specific postings, as these are determined by administrative requirements and public interest.
Thank God …we are PSU bankers and not govt employee😂😂😂😂