High Court Quashes Transfer Order of KSRTC Employee Due to Arbitrariness and Lack of Administrative Exigency -- Writ Petition Under Article 226 Allowed with Reinstatement and Back Wages

Sub Category: Karnataka High Court Bench: DHARWAD

Admin

2026-03-01 09:50:53

Font size:

Case Note & Summary

The petitioner, a Driver-cum-Conductor in the North West Road Transport Corporation, challenged his transfer from Chikodi Division to Belagavi/Khanapur Division via orders dated 30.11.2024 and 02.01.2025, alleging arbitrariness and lack of administrative grounds. He had worked for 13 years without blemish and was the only employee transferred without a request among 43 others who had requested transfers. The respondents contended the transfer was on administrative grounds and the petition was infructuous as he had joined the new post. The Court found the transfer order lacked reasons, was arbitrary, and did not comply with the Corporation's Regulations. It held that joining the transferred post does not waive the right to challenge, and quashed the orders, directing reinstatement with back wages and continuity of service.

Headnote

The High Court of Karnataka at Dharwad, in Writ Petition , quashed the transfer and movement orders issued against the petitioner, a Driver-cum-Conductor in the North West Road Transport Corporation -- The petitioner had been transferred from Chikodi Division to Belagavi/Khanapur Division on 30.11.2024, along with 43 other employees who had requested transfers, but he was the only one transferred without a request -- The Court held that the transfer order was arbitrary as it lacked reasons and administrative exigency, violating principles of natural justice and the Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation (Cadre and Recruitment) Regulations, 1982 -- The respondents argued that the petition had become infructuous as the petitioner had joined the transferred post, but the Court rejected this, noting that compliance does not preclude challenge -- The petition was filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, seeking certiorari to quash the orders -- The Court allowed the writ petition, setting aside the impugned orders and directing the respondents to reinstate the petitioner to his original position with back wages and continuity of service

Premium Content

The Headnote is only available to subscribed members.

Subscribe Now to access key legal points

Issue of Consideration: The Issue of whether the transfer order dated 30.11.2024 and movement order dated 02.01.2025 were arbitrary and lacked administrative exigency

Premium Content

The Issue of Consideration is only available to subscribed members.

Subscribe Now to access critical case issues

Final Decision

The Court allowed the writ petition, quashed the transfer order dated 30.11.2024 and movement order dated 02.01.2025, and directed the respondents to reinstate the petitioner to his original position in Chikodi Division with back wages and continuity of service

2026 LawText (KAR) (01) 58

Writ Petition No. 100194 of 2025 (S-KSRTC)

2026-01-23

Smt. Justice Lalitha Kanneganti

HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:858

Sri. Raghuveer R. Sattigeri for Petitioner, Sri. Prashanth S. Hosmani for Respondents

Shri. Chandrakanth Y. Toravi

The Managing Director, N.W.K.R.T.C., Central Office, Hubli; The Chief Traffic Manager, N.W.K.R.T.C., Central Office, Hubli; The Divisional Controller, N.W.K.R.T.C., Chikodi Division, Chikodi; The Depot Manager, N.W.K.R.T.C., Athani Depot, Chikodi Division, Chikodi

Premium Content

The Indexes are only available to subscribed members.

Subscribe Now to access critical case indexes

Nature of Litigation: Writ petition challenging transfer and movement orders issued by the North West Road Transport Corporation

Remedy Sought

The petitioner sought a writ of certiorari to quash the transfer order dated 30.11.2024 and movement order dated 02.01.2025, and reinstatement to his original position

Filing Reason

The petitioner alleged that the transfer was arbitrary, lacked administrative grounds, and violated the KSRTC Regulations, as he was the only employee transferred without a request

Previous Decisions

A Co-ordinate Bench granted an interim order on 13.02.2025, which was extended, and noted that the petitioner's joining of the transferred post would be subject to the writ petition's outcome

Issues

Whether the transfer order dated 30.11.2024 and movement order dated 02.01.2025 were arbitrary and lacked administrative exigency Whether the writ petition had become infructuous due to the petitioner joining the transferred post

Submissions/Arguments

The petitioner argued that the transfer was without basis, violated KSRTC Regulations, and singled him out without reasons The respondents argued that the transfer was on administrative grounds, compliant with Regulations, and the petition was infructuous as the petitioner had joined the new post

Ratio Decidendi

Transfer orders must be based on administrative exigencies and provide reasons to avoid arbitrariness; compliance with a transfer order does not waive the right to challenge its validity under judicial review

Judgment Excerpts

The transfer order should contain the reasons and the petitioner cannot be singled out -- Para 6 A Co-ordinate Bench of this Court has passed an order that, in the light of the fact that the petitioner has joined the transferred post and working since then, it would remain subject to the result of the writ petition -- Para 6 The impugned order does not even contain any reasons as to why the petitioner is transferred and what are the reasons and exigencies -- Para 6

Procedural History

The writ petition was filed on 2025; an interim order was granted on 13.02.2025 and extended; the matter was heard on 23.01.2026, with the Court quashing the orders and directing reinstatement