Uttarakhand High Court Overturns Transfer of Medical Health Officer
In a significant ruling, the Uttarakhand High Court has set aside the transfer of Rajani Rawat, who served as the Chief Administrative Officer (CAO) in the Directorate of Medical Health Services. The court determined that the transfer order, issued on February 13, failed to comply with the mandatory procedural safeguards outlined in the Uttarakhand Annual Transfer for Public Servants Act, 2017.
Legal Challenge and Grounds for Petition
The petition was filed against the transfer order issued by the Director General (DG) of Medical Health and Family Welfare, which reassigned Rawat to the District Hospital in Chamoli while retaining her same capacity. Rawat contended that this transfer was based on a report dated June 30, 2025, submitted by the DG. This report allegedly relied on complaints from other employees in Dehradun without conducting a proper inquiry or seeking her explanation.
Relying on Section 18(4) of the 2017 Act, the petitioner argued that transfers on administrative grounds are permissible only after a necessary inquiry and confirmation of serious complaints. The provision explicitly states that such transfers should not be made casually or based on routine complaints and must expressly mention administrative grounds in the order.
It was further argued that the law presupposes verification of allegations and an opportunity for the employee to rebut them with supporting evidence, which was not followed in this case.
State's Defense and Allegations
The state, represented by instructions from the Assistant Director (Administration) on behalf of the DG, alleged that Rawat had failed to comply with an earlier interdepartmental transfer order. Additionally, the state referenced complaints by other employees and stated that allegations of financial irregularities led to the constitution of an inquiry committee by an order dated October 14, 2025.
The state further submitted that Rawat had been directed to furnish audit reports for the past six years of the Uttaranchal Medical and Public Health Ministerial Association, where she served as president for a considerable period, but failed to do so.
Court's Observations and Ruling
A bench comprising Chief Justice Manoj Kumar Gupta and Justice Subhash Upadhyay, in its order dated February 25, noted that although the state asserted Rawat had been given a full opportunity during the inquiry, none of the annexed documents indicated any such hearing had been granted. The court also found no reference to any explanation submitted by Rawat regarding the alleged defaults.
The bench held that the transfer order was not preceded by a proper inquiry and observed that the findings in the June 30 report appeared to be based on the DG's own perception, which did not satisfy the statutory requirements.
Accordingly, the High Court quashed the transfer order. Noting that Rawat had already submitted a detailed representation on February 15 addressing the allegations in the report, the court permitted the respondents to pass a fresh order after considering this representation and affording her a proper opportunity of hearing. The petition was disposed of with a clarification that Rawat shall cooperate in the inquiry proceedings.
