The Punjab & Haryana High Court has upheld the Online Transfer Policy, which prioritises older employees for transfers. The court ruled that this preference is reasonable and does not violate constitutional principles.
Several employees had filed petitions challenging the policy, arguing that it unfairly disadvantaged younger employees. They claimed that allocating 60 marks for age in the transfer- evaluation process was arbitrary and violated Article 14 of the Constitution. The court, however, rejected these arguments, stating that every employee will eventually grow older and benefit from the policy in due course.
The petitioners, employed as sub-divisional engineers (civil) with the Haryana State Agriculture Marketing Board, contested the transfer policy’s specific clauses. They argued that younger employees would receive lower marks, limiting their chances of securing preferred postings. Additionally, they opposed negative marking for past departmental punishments, calling it a form of double jeopardy.
The government defended the policy, stating that it was modelled after the State’s general transfer guidelines and had received approval at various administrative levels, including from the chief minister. The policy was designed to ensure transparency and prevent favouritism in employee transfers.
The court emphasised that policy decisions fall under the jurisdiction of the executive and should not be interfered with unless they are absolutely unreasonable. It acknowledged that older employees often face greater family responsibilities and health concerns, making the classification justified and fair. The court also noted that the policy does not deprive younger employees of opportunities, as they too will eventually qualify for higher marks as they age.
The court ruled that the policy was legally valid, fair, and non-arbitrary. It dismissed the petitions, affirming the employer’s right to determine transfer guidelines while ensuring a transparent mechanism to deal with grievances of the affected employees.
