TMI Blog2023 (9) TMI 170X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o. Pet. No. 13 of 2014, whereby the petitioner was authorised to conduct the sale of assets of wound-up company named M/s Indian Technomac Pvt. Ltd. It has also been propagated that the petitioner had detected the invasion of huge amount of taxes by M/s Indian Technomac Pvt Ltd. Company and it was for such reason that he was repeatedly posted at Nahan, Paonta Sahib or Parwanoo - the case of the petitioner is that the official respondents have some hidden purpose to see that the petitioner does not remain involved in the matter of M/s Indian Technomac Pvt. Ltd. Company - It is more than settled that the allegations of malafide have to be specifically pleaded and then have to be proved by cogent material. There is no material on record to infer that there is any motive of the government in transferring the petitioner from Parwanoo to Shimla. Mere fact that the official respondents have passed orders four times to transfer petitioner within a span of last seven years is not sufficient to infer any motive of the employer in doing so, much less a motive which can be termed as oblique or ulterior. Even the transfer policy adopted by the State Government does not reserve any privilege ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is created from any quarter in the process. 2. Petitioner has alleged the impugned transfer notification to be arbitrary, unconstitutional, result of nepotism and against the transfer policy adopted by the Stated Government. As per the petitioner, the impugned notification is actuated with malafide intention and oblique motive. It is further alleged that there is neither any administrative exigency nor the public interest in transferring the petitioner from Parwanoo to Shimla and the only purpose of such exercise is to accommodate respondent No. 3 in his home district. 3. The case as built by the petitioner is that in January, 2014, he was promoted to the post of Assistant Excise and Taxation Commissioner and was posted at Economic Intelligence Unit, Shimla. Petitioner, during his aforesaid posting, in the month of June, 2014 detected cases of huge tax evasion amounting to Rs.2100 crores by an industrial unit M/s Indian Technomac Pvt. Ltd., Paonta Sahib, District Sirmour, H.P. Petitioner remained on study leave for one year from July, 2015 to June, 2016. He again joined at Economic Intelligence Unit, Shimla. Petitioner claims that while he was waiting posting orders, recom ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ner, State Taxes and Excise, District Sirmaur at Nahan, H.P, however, in view of order dated 8.8.2019, passed by learned Single Judge in Company Application No.54/15, filed in Company Petition No. 13 of 2014, the petitioner being Deputy Commissioner, State Taxes and Excise, District Sirmaur, H.P., has been nominated by name as authorized officer for conducting sale in association with the secured creditors and official liquidator of the assets of the company M/s Indian Technomac Pvt. Limited. We are in agreement with learned counsel, representing the petitioner that conducting the sale of the assets of the company is a laborious task and it is not possible for the petitioner to discharge such responsibility while being on circuit to Nahan, that too, in the absence of the record and also the staff. Therefore, the submissions made by learned Additional Advocate General that he can be spared to conduct the auction proceedings at Nahan on circuit from Shimla, are without any substance. Otherwise also, in view of specific order of this Court, the respondents before resorting to the transfer of the petitioner should have bare minimum courtesy to have sought leave of the Court ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hich petitioner alleges to be a link in the chain of events evidencing a conspiracy to keep the petitioner away from the affairs of Indian Technomac Pvt. Ltd. 11. Respondents No. 1 and 2 have contested the claim of the petitioner. The allegations of any motive to transfer the petitioner from Parwanoo to Shimla have specifically been denied. It is submitted that there was no ulterior/oblique motive to transfer the petitioner, who had completed his normal tenure at Parwanoo. It is further submitted that even CWP No., 2331 of 2019 was dismissed by this Court on 07.01.2020 by holding that no case for interference was made out as the petitioner had completed his normal tenure. In addition, the right of the employer to consider as to where the services of petitioner were required, was upheld. Petitioner has been accused of deliberately suppressing the material fact of dismissal of CWP No. 2331 of 2019. As per the official respondents, the company Court had ordered the petitioner to be the part of team for sale of assets of M/s Indian Technomac Pvt Ltd. only for the reason that the petitioner at the relevant time was posted at Nahan within whose jurisdiction the sale was to be effected ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... No. 2331 of 2019. It has also been submitted that the conduct of sale of assets of the company is a laborious task and it is not possible for anyone to discharge the same in the absence of office, record and staff. As per petitioner, the notification dated 18.01.2021 Annexure P-8 was issued by the competent authority on the basis of order dated 04.12.2019 passed in CWP No. 2331 of 2019, therefore, the said order dated 04.12.2019 was more relevant than the order dated 07.01.2020 passed in CWP No. 2331 of 2019. Rest of the contents of the reply have been denied and those of the petition have been reiterated. The thrust of the petitioner, by way of detailed averments made in rejoinder is to impress upon those other officers of the department, who were assigned the same job, were not able to perform rather had to face criminal investigation in pursuance to FIR registered by the police. As regards allegations with respect to the involvement of the petitioner in departmental as well as vigilance inquiry, it has been submitted that the same is result of manipulation and conspiracy against the petitioner. Petitioner has also tried to explain that the entire effort of official respondents ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Mohd. Masood Ahmad vs. State of U.P. Others, (2008)1 SCC 180 , the Hon ble Supreme Court has held as under: - 7. The scope of judicial review of transfer under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been settled by the Supreme Court in Rajendra Rao vs. Union of India (1993) 1 SCC 148; (AIR 1939 SC 1236), National Hydroelectric Power Corporation Ltd. vs. Shri Bhagwan (2001) 8 SCC 574; (AIR 2001 SC 3309), State Bank of India vs. Anjan Sanyal (2001) 5 SCC 508; (AIR 2001 SC 1748). Following the aforesaid principles laid down by the Supreme Court, the Allahabad High Court in Vijay Pal Singh vs. State of U.P.(1997) 3 ESC 1668; (1998) All LJ 70) and Onkarnath Tiwari vs. The Chief Engineer, Minor Irrigation Department, U.P. Lucknow (1997) 3 ESC 1866; (1998 All LJ 245), has held that the principle of law laid down in the aforesaid decisions is that an order of transfer is a part of the service conditions of an employee which should not be interfered with ordinarily by a Court of law in exercise of its discretionary jurisdiction under Article 226 unless the Court finds that either the order is mala fide or that the service rules prohibit such transfer, or that the authori ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... gitimate exercise of power has, in fact, been acting malafide in the sense of pursuing an illegitimate aim. It is not the law that mala fide in the sense of improper motive should be established only by direct evidence. But it must be discernible from the order impugned or must be shown from the established surrounding factors which preceded the order. If bad faith would vitiate the order, the same can, in our opinion, be deduced as a reasonable and inescapable inference from proved facts. (See S. Pratap Singh v. The State of Punjab, [1964] 4 SCR 733 ). It cannot be overlooked that burden of establishing mala fides is very heavy on the person who alleges it. The allegations of mala fides are often more easily made than proved, and the very seriousness of such allegations demand proof of a high order of credibility. As noted by this Court in R.P. Royappa v. State of Tamil Nadu and Anr., AIR (1974) SC 555 , Courts would be slow to draw dubious inferences from incomplete facts placed before it by a party, particularly when the imputations are grave and they are made against the holder of an office which has a high responsibility in the administration. ( See. Indian Rly. Cons ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fide for such considerations. Mere assertion or a vague or bald statement is not sufficient. It must be demonstrated either by admitted or proved facts and circumstances obtainable in a given case. If it is established that the action has been taken mala fide for any such considerations or by fraud on power or colourable exercise of power, it cannot be allowed to stand. (emphasis supplied) 26.2 We may also refer to the decision of this Court in Ajit Kumar Nag v. General Manager (PJ), Indian Oil Corpn. Ltd., Haldia and Ors. (2005) 7 SCC 764 where the Court declared that allegations of mala fides need proof of high degree and that an administrative action is presumed to be bona fide unless the contrary is satisfactorily established. The Court observed: 56. It is well settled that the burden of proving mala fide is on the person making the allegations and the burden is very heavy . ( vide E.P. Royappa v. State of T.N. (1974) 4 SCC 3 ) There is every presumption in favour of the administration that the power has been exercised bona fide and in good faith. It is to be remembered that the allegations of mala fide are often more easily made than made out and the ver ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Class I, Gazetted officer(s). Rather, the flipside of the facts as have merged can be the unwillingness of the petitioner himself to be get detached from the affairs of Indian Technomac Limited. 23. Except for self-proclaimed necessity of petitioner to look after the affairs of sale of assets of M/s Indian Technomac Pvt. Ltd., there is no cogent material to warrant such assumption. As per the petitioner himself, the Indian Technomac Pvt. Ltd. Company was in default of about Rs. 2100 crores by way of evasion of taxes. Petitioner has been at the helm of affairs for selling the assets of M/s Indian Technomac Pvt. Ltd. Company with a purpose to effect recovery of the State dues for the last about six years. The sale of assets worth about Rs. six crores is stated to have been effected till date, which in comparison to the entire amount of default if minuscule. Thus, to say that the petitioner has been able to achieve exceptional will be a fallacy. By quoting examples of few officers who allegedly were not able to achieve, petitioner cannot paint the entire rank with the same stroke of brush. Admittedly, petitioner has remained in-charge of the process of sale of assets of M/s Indian ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
