Modify 2019 govt resolution to restore inter-division transfer rights for non-gazetted employees: MAT tells Maha govt

Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar: The Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal's (MAT) Aurangabad bench has directed the state govt to modify, within three months, a 2019 Govt Resolution (GR) on transfer policy and extend inter-divisional transfer benefits to Group-B (non-gazetted) employees. The tribunal held the exclusion of these employees as "arbitrary, discriminatory and violative of Articles 14 (equality before law) and 16 (equality of opportunity in matters of public employment) of the Constitution." MAT's division bench of Vice Chairman Justice V.K. Jadhav and administrative member Vinay Kargaonkar passed the order on April 30 while allowing three original applications filed by stenographers working across various districts. The tribunal was hearing a batch of petitions filed by Adv Suchita Dhongde on behalf of Group-B (non-gazetted) employees, primarily stenographers (lower grade), posted in districts including Hingoli, Jalgaon, Nashik, Sindhudurg and Mumbai. The applicants challenged Clause 1 of the Government Resolution (GR) dated May 15, 2019, which restricted inter-division transfers only to Group-C employees. The tribunal noted that an earlier GR issued on June 3, 2011, had allowed both Group-B (non-gazetted) and Group-C employees to seek inter-divisional transfers after fulfilling certain conditions, including completion of five years of service. However, the 2019 GR superseded the earlier policy and limited the benefit exclusively to Group-C employees, effectively excluding Group-B (non-gazetted) staff. The state government defended the move, citing administrative efficiency and the need to prevent large-scale vacancies caused by transfer requests.Rejecting this argument, the tribunal observed that there was "no rational justification" for removing Group-B employees from the policy framework while retaining benefits for Group-C employees. It said the restriction lacked a rational nexus to its objective and was inconsistent with statutory provisions. The applicants placed on record detailed individual cases, highlighting that many had been working 150 km to 850 km away from their native places for over a decade. Several cited compelling personal reasons such as caring for elderly parents suffering from heart disease, paralysis and other ailments, as well as managing children's education and health. In one case, a stenographer posted in Hingoli sought transfer to Yavatmal to care for his ailing parents, while another employee working in Mumbai cited a distance of over 850 km from his native Chandrapur. The bench noted that the original intent of the 2011 policy was humanitarian, meant to address exceptional personal hardships. It held that administrative convenience cannot override the principle of equality when similarly placed employees are treated differently.Referring to the Maharashtra Civil Services (Conduct) Rules, 1979, the tribunal said the classification of Group-B and Group-C posts does not support differential treatment in matters of transfer. It ruled that the 2019 GR's exclusion of Group-B (non-gazetted) employees contradicts the statutory framework and violates constitutional guarantees of equality in public employment.