Whistleblowers not immune from transfers: Delhi High Court

In his petition, the man contended that the order was motivated by malice and intended as retaliation for his role as an internal whistleblower.

The Delhi High Court ruled that a whistleblower cannot claim permanent immunity from transfer merely by alleging that the move is an act of retaliation by officials.

The court upheld the order, noting that there was no evidence of malafide intent or any connection between his alleged whistleblowing and the transfer. (Getty Images/iStockphoto)

A bench of justices C Hari Shankar and Om Prakash Shukla delivered the verdict on Tuesday while hearing a plea filed by a Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF) personnel against his July 17 transfer from Noida to the 87th Battalion in Manipur.

In his petition, the man contended that the order was motivated by malice and intended as retaliation for his role as an internal whistleblower. He alleged that authorities had repeatedly targeted him, issuing baseless chargesheets and denying him transport allowance.

The CRPF’s counsel, on the other hand, argued that the transfer was routine, made pursuant to his completion of tenure at his current posting.

The court upheld the order, noting that there was no evidence of malafide intent or any connection between his alleged whistleblowing and the transfer. The authorities, it recorded in its nine-page ruling, had clarified that the decision was for “administrative reasons.”

“Transfer is an incidence of service. It cannot be that, by merely levelling allegations against the officials of the department or claiming to be an internal whistleblower, an employee can forever immunize himself against transfer,” the court said in its ruling released on Thursday.

It added, “Of course, if the employee is able to satisfy the court that there is a link between his whistle-blowing activities and the transfer order, the court would be justified in interfering.”