Calcutta HC Dismisses PIL Challenging Transfers Of Officers By EC In Poll-bound Bengal

Kolkata: The Kolkata High Court on Tuesday dismissed a PIL challenging the transfer of administrative and police officers by the poll panel in West Bengal, saying the petitioner could not prove that the actions were arbitrary and prejudicial to public interest.The Election Commission transferred several officers, including the state chief secretary, home minister and DGP, after announcing the schedule of assembly polls in the state.

The petitioner demanded that the ballot box decisions be annulled, claiming that these large-scale transfers would affect the functioning of the state government.

Dismissing the petition, a division bench headed by Chief Justice Sujoy Paul held that the petitioner could not prove that the Election Commission of India had exercised its authority to transfer officers arbitrarily and that it had caused any detriment to public interest.

“If this essential ingredient to sustain a PIL is not established, the petition is inadmissible,” the division bench, also comprising Justice Partha Sarathi Sen, said.

“In our view, the legality, validity and propriety of transfer orders that do not cause any public harm cannot be subject to a lawsuit in the public interest,” the court said. he said.

It was stated that the petitioner Arka Kumar Nag was making efforts to create a nexus between some senior politicians and Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar.

However, ECI’s lawyer DS Naidu stated that none of such persons, against whom allegations of connivance or pressure tactics have been made as alleged, have been named.

The apex court held that no allegation of bad faith could be made against the ballot box committee and observed that “no material can be adduced to establish such a connection other than express pleadings.”

Just because the ECI transferred a sizeable number of officers, the action cannot be said to be arbitrary, capricious or malicious; This cannot be said to be even more valid “when a similar or larger number of civil servants are transferred/assigned across the country”.

“Therefore, we find no reason to believe that the ECI has exercised any step-motherly treatment while shifting or transferring officers in West Bengal,” the court said.

He said the petitioner has failed to make such a case, which clearly and unequivocally establishes that any order of transfer of officers will lead to administrative collapse and deprivation of development plans to the people.

Accepting that transfer is a service incident, the division bench said that if a transfer order is contrary to any statutory provision, the aggrieved employee or officer can challenge it in appropriate proceedings.

However, the court said that this decision will not prevent the aggrieved officers from challenging the transfer decisions through appropriate proceedings in accordance with the law.

Noting that the petitioner is a lawyer, the board said that it could not file a complaint regarding the transfer of civil servants unless such actions harm the public interest.

On the petitioner’s request to initiate impeachment proceedings against the CEC, the court said it did not see any reason to take up this issue in the present case.

The bench said it could not find anything “very significant” in the arguments of the petitioner’s lawyer Kalyan Banerjee and Solicitor General Kishore Dutta, representing the West Bengal government, that a vacuum was being created in the state due to transfer of a significant number of officers and staff.

The court stated that in the current case, it was observed that while one officer was replaced, another took over this duty. “Therefore, there was no gap in the system or administrative area,” the board said.

The bench also said that the state of West Bengal, which supported the petitioner, was a defendant in the case and “cannot step into the shoes of the petitioner”.

Elections to the 294-member West Bengal assembly will be held in two phases on April 23 and 29. Votes will be counted on May 4.