HC sets aside PIL on transfer of investigator in Bhovi Corporation scam

NT Correspondent

Bengaluru: The High Court of Karnataka recently dismissed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed challenging the transfer of A.D. Nagaraju, the investigating officer who was conducting an inquiry into alleged financial irregularities amounting to several crores in the Karnataka Bhovi Development Corporation pending in the Kalagi police station, Kalburgi district.

The petition also sought for retaining the "present managing director, general manager and other staff in the Corporation till the completion and submission of Final Investigation Report."

The division bench of Chief Justice Prasanna B. Varale and Justice Krishna S. Dixit heard the petition filed by former minister Goolihatti D. Shekar.

The divisional bench said that the government has the discretion to appoint officials wherever necessary and transfer them when required as long as the administration continues its job. Transfer of government officers in a PIL cannot be entertained, the Court said.

"WE decline indulgence in the matter being broadly in agreement with the submission made on behalf of the official respondents. It hardly needs to be stated that the officials of the Government have a specified retention period as governed by the Transfer Guidelines. If the transfer takes place in violation of these guidelines, it is for the aggrieved official to seek redressal in accordance with law and a third party like the petitioner cannot be permitted to lay a challenge to the displacement in the guise of espousing the public interest. Ordinarily, transfers are effected by the Government in the public interest itself, cannot be discounted," the HC said in its judgement on December 15.

The bench further said that the petitioner has no right to interfere in the appointment of officials and that the government has the power to make such appointments without any interference.

The court also directed the government to continue the inquiry until completion and submit the final report.

The HC said that there was no public interest in the litigation and the arguments for the same does not inspire confidence, dismissing the petition.