In a significant development, the Kerala High Court on Monday directed the Ernakulam Bench of the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) to first determine the legal standing of petitions submitted by senior IAS officer B. Ashok. Mr. Ashok is contesting the State government’s decision to transfer him from his roles as Principal Secretary, Agriculture, and Agricultural Production Commissioner.
A Division Bench comprising Justice Nithin Jamdar and Justice Basant Balaji emphasized that the CAT’s initial focus must be on resolving the contentious issue of the Governor being named as a respondent in the case.
This directive from the High Court came during its review of petitions filed by the state government. The government is challenging earlier interim orders from the CAT, which had set aside Mr. Ashok’s inter-cadre transfer.
Following his removal from the agriculture posts, the government appointed Mr. Ashok as CMD of the Kerala Transport Development Finance Corporation (KTDFC), and subsequently as Chairperson of the Local Self-Government Reforms Commission on deputation. The CAT, however, had issued a stay on these government orders.
The State government, in its appeal against the stay, argued before the High Court that transfers and postings are intrinsic to civil service, and IAS officers do not possess a perpetual right to any specific post. Furthermore, the government asserted that Mr. Ashok’s pleas before the CAT were not legally sound because he had “improperly impleaded” the Governor as a respondent in a service transfer dispute.
Counsel for Mr. Ashok noted that the State had previously raised this objection before the CAT, and the Governor had indicated no opposition to being included in the petitions. After considering arguments from both sides, the High Court concluded that the CAT must prioritize the maintainability of Mr. Ashok’s petitions and scheduled the case for further hearing on September 29.
On the same day, the court is also expected to address another petition from the government. This separate plea challenges a CAT interim order that requires the recommendation of the Civil Services Board (CSB) for transferring IAS officers.
Earlier on Monday, the government had already lodged a preliminary objection with the CAT, arguing that naming the Governor as a respondent is constitutionally impermissible and legally untenable. They cited repeated affirmations by the Supreme Court that the Governor cannot be held personally accountable in court proceedings, identifying the State government as the appropriate party. Arguments before the CAT on this specific matter are slated to continue on Tuesday.