Kerala HC to Hear State Govt Plea Against CAT Order

Kerala HC adjourns plea on CAT order mandating Civil Services Board approval for IAS transfers; matter linked to B Ashok’s case.

0

The Kerala High Court has adjourned to September 29 the state government’s petition challenging a 2023 interim order of the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT), which made the Civil Services Board’s (CSB) recommendation mandatory for transferring IAS officers. The matter will be heard along with the state’s petitions against CAT’s stay orders on the transfer of senior IAS officer B Ashok IAS:1998:KL).

The order in question was delivered by the Kochi Bench of CAT on November 11, 2023, in response to a petition filed by the Kerala IAS Officers’ Association. The association had alleged violations of the IAS Cadre Rules, 1954, and the 2014 amendment governing transfers and appointments. The amendment requires that cadre officers be transferred or appointed only on the CSB’s recommendation and provides a minimum tenure of two years, unless the officer is promoted, retired, or deputed. The CAT’s ruling also drew strength from the Supreme Court’s judgment in the T S R Subramanian case, which emphasized fixed tenure for civil servants.

Nearly two years later, the state has now moved the High Court arguing that the CAT order hampers governance by freezing essential postings at a time of cadre shortages, potentially causing disproportionate harm to public administration. The government also linked the challenge to CAT’s stay on Ashok’s repeated transfers, contending that the tribunal’s interpretation of the 2023 order directly affects the case.

During Monday’s hearing, the Bench of Chief Justice Nitin Jamdar and Justice Basant Balaji asked about the delay in challenging the CAT order. Advocate General K. Gopalakrishna Kurup submitted that the state had not approached the court earlier since the matter was still before CAT. He argued that while the 2023 order does not explicitly mandate CSB approval for every transfer, the tribunal has been interpreting it as such, causing serious prejudice to the administration.