High Court of Karnataka Allows Writ Appeals in Service Matter — Transfer Orders Set Aside for Non-Compliance with Transfer Policy and Lack of Reasoned Consideration of Representations. The court held that the Corporation failed to consider representations and did not demonstrate public interest, violating the Transfer Policy.

High Court: Karnataka High Court Bench: BENGALURU In Favour of Accused

Admin

2026-05-18 19:52:46

Font size:

Case Note & Summary

The case involves writ appeals filed by employees of Karnataka Power Corporation Ltd. (KPCL) challenging transfer orders issued by the Corporation. The appellants, including K Harisha and others, were working as Executive Engineers and other positions at various power stations. They were transferred to different locations, and they made representations against the transfers, which were not considered. The learned Single Judge dismissed their writ petitions without examining the merits. The Division Bench of the High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru, comprising Justice D K Singh and Justice Tara Vitasta Ganju, heard the appeals. The court found that the Corporation had not complied with its Transfer Policy, which required consideration of representations and posting in public interest. The court held that the writ court erred in dismissing the petitions without examining the merits. The court set aside the transfer orders and directed the Corporation to reconsider the representations and pass reasoned orders within a specified time. The appeals were allowed.

Headnote

A) Service Law - Transfer Policy - Compliance - The court examined whether the transfer orders issued by the Corporation were in accordance with the Transfer Policy, which required consideration of representations and posting of employees in public interest. The court held that the transfer orders were not sustainable as the Corporation failed to consider the representations made by the employees and did not provide reasons for rejecting them. (Paras 1-10)

B) Administrative Law - Reasoned Order - Judicial Review - The court considered the scope of judicial review in transfer matters and held that while courts normally do not interfere with transfer orders, they must ensure that the authority has acted in accordance with the policy and has considered the employee's representation. The writ court's dismissal without examining the merits was erroneous. (Paras 11-20)

C) Service Law - Transfer - Public Interest - The court noted that the Transfer Policy required transfers to be made in public interest, but the Corporation did not demonstrate any public interest in the impugned transfers. The court set aside the transfer orders and directed the Corporation to reconsider the representations. (Paras 21-30)

Issue of Consideration

Whether the transfer orders issued by Karnataka Power Corporation Ltd. were valid and in compliance with the Transfer Policy, and whether the writ court erred in dismissing the petitions without examining the merits of the appellants' representations.

Final Decision

Writ appeals allowed. Transfer orders set aside. Corporation directed to reconsider representations and pass reasoned orders within four weeks.

Law Points

Transfer policy
reasoned order
consideration of representation
public interest
administrative discretion
judicial review

Case Details

2025 LawText (KAR) (11) 30

WA No. 548 of 2025 (S-RES) C/W WA No. 579 of 2025, WA No. 608 of 2025, WA No. 611 of 2025

2025-11-13

Justice D K Singh, Justice Tara Vitasta Ganju

Sri S.S. Naganand, Senior Counsel along with Subramanya Bhat M., Advocate

K Harisha and others

Karnataka Power Corporation Ltd. and others

Nature of Litigation

Service matter - challenge to transfer orders

Remedy Sought

Setting aside of transfer orders and consideration of representations

Filing Reason

Transfer orders issued by KPCL without considering representations and in violation of Transfer Policy

Previous Decisions

Learned Single Judge dismissed writ petitions without examining merits

Issues

Whether the transfer orders were in compliance with the Transfer Policy Whether the writ court erred in dismissing the petitions without examining the merits

Submissions/Arguments

Appellants argued that transfer orders were arbitrary and in violation of Transfer Policy Respondent Corporation argued that transfers were in public interest and representations were considered

Ratio Decidendi

Transfer orders must comply with the Transfer Policy, which requires consideration of representations and posting in public interest. The writ court must examine the merits of the case and not dismiss petitions without considering the policy and representations.

Judgment Excerpts

The court held that the transfer orders were not sustainable as the Corporation failed to consider the representations made by the employees and did not provide reasons for rejecting them.