'Colourable Exercise Of Power': Kerala High Court Sets Aside Order Transferring KSRTC Bus Driver Over Bottle Row

After a detailed hearing yesterday, Justice N. Nagaresh observed that Jaimon's transfer from Ponkunnam in Ponkunnam in Kottayam district to Pudukkad in Thrissur district was punitive in nature since there was no justifiable reason for the same.

It observed:

“The respondents have not advanced any circumstances justifying the transfer of the petitioner from Ponkunnam to Puthukkad O/C. In the absence of any justifiable reason, the transfer of the petitioner in contemplation of disciplinary proceedings would be punitive in nature. Viewed in that angle, Ext.P1 memorandum suffers from malice in law. Ext.P1 therefore can only be treated as a colourable exercise of power.”

Jaimon's case was that he was transferred merely because the Transport Minister had intervened in the issue and that there is no 'administrative convenience' as alleged in the transfer order. It was contended that during his entire service period, there has not been even a single instance of misconduct.

He had stated that he was carrying two bottles of water to drink during his long trip of more than 210 km from Ponkunnam to Thiruvananthapuram, which was not supposed to be interrupted in between. He has stated that one bottle is insufficient due to the hot weather and the heat emanating from the engine.

The KSRTC, on the other hand, contended the transfer was made pending disciplinary proceedings on administrative grounds. The standing counsel relied on Clause 11 of the Transfer Guidelines in the Pay Revision Agreement, 2012, which granted such power to the KSRTC.

It was also argued that KSRTC has been taking earnest steps to maintain cleanliness in its buses and that the employees are bound to follow these guidelines.

The Court noted that the petitioner was not issued with any memo or charges in respect of any misconduct and thus, the transfer is punitive in nature.

Though 'administrative convenience' was the wordings used in the transfer memorandum, the Court felt that the same was not discernible from the memorandum or the counter-affidavit of the respondents.

It found that a transfer is justifiable if employee's service is required in the transferred station or if transfer is necessary not to affect disciplinary proceedings against an employee or if it is in the interest of the institution or in larger public interest. However, no such justifications are present in the instant case, the Court opined.

It, thus, allowed Jaimon's plea and set aside the transfer. It further directed the respondents to permit Jaimon to continue to work in Ponkunnam.

Background

The controversy arose on October 1, when the State Transport Minister, K.B. Ganesh, called up the media and stopped the fast passenger bus at Ayoor on its route from Mundakayam to Thiruvananthapuram and found the bus in an unclean condition with empty water bottles piled up inside the cabin.

Subsequently, on October 4, vide memorandum issued by the Executive Officer on instructions of the Chairman, KSRTC, Jaimon was transferred from Ponkunnam to Pudukkad. Aggrieved, he came before the High Court to set aside his 'arbitrary' transfer.

Case No: WP(C) No. 37736 of 2025

Case Title: Jaimon Joseph v. KSRTC and Ors.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 651

Counsel for the petitioner: P. Mohandas (Ernakulam), K. Sudhinkumar, Sabu Pullan, R. Bhaskara Krishnan, Bharath Mohan, Dr. K.P. Satheesan (Sr.)

Counsel for the respondents: Deepu Thankan - SC - KSRTC

Click to Read/Download judgment