Tribunal directs CBDT to overhaul transfer policy within 6 months

In an order passed on March 4, the country’s apex administrative tribunal has directed the CBDT chairman to overhaul this arbitrary and unjust system within six months and formulate a “prudent, humane, and compassionate” transfer policy that applies equally to all employees—whether gazetted or non-gazetted.

The battle against this open discrimination was taken up by a group of Group C and D employees — inspectors, stenographers, and tax assistants — who found themselves shackled by an unfair rule. While Group A officers enjoy a guaranteed transfer to be with their spouse, subject to availability, lower-ranked officials are forced to make do with a restrictive “loan basis transfer” policy, which allows them to live with their spouse for a maximum of five years, and only at the mercy of the board’s approval.

Represented by advocates Rishabh Sancheti and Padma Priya, the petitioners pointed out that this disparity violates Article 14 of the Constitution, which guarantees equality before the law.

“The loan basis transfer policy, applicable only to Group C and D employees, does not just limit how long they can stay with their spouses but also actively disincentivises family life. If a lower-ranked employee avails this transfer, their chances of promotion suffer, as they can only be considered for career advancement in their home region, not in the region they are transferred to. In stark contrast, Group A officers, who are governed by the IRS Transfer Policy, 2010, face no such punitive measures,” the petitioners said.

The employees argued that the CBDT’s policy contradicts a Department of Personnel and Training (DoPT) circular issued in 2009, which mandates that spouses working in the same government service should be posted at the same station, wherever possible.

Calling out this anomaly, the tribunal bench, comprising judicial member Harvinder Kaur Oberoi and administrative member Sumeet Jerath, held that such a policy undermines morale, deprives lower-ranked employees of their right to family life, and goes against the constitutional principles of fairness and equality.

The bench emphasised that a fair transfer policy would motivate and inspire non-gazetted employees to work with greater dedication and efficiency, ultimately enhancing the CBDT’s reputation as a model employer in a welfare state.

The tribunal also cited a landmark Supreme Court ruling from 2022 (SK Nausad Rehaman case), which unequivocally stated that the government must respect family life when formulating transfer policies. In this judgment, the apex court held that the State cannot be oblivious to basic constitutional values, including the preservation of family life, which is an incident of Article 21 of the Constitution.

In its defence, THE CBDT argued that employees had accepted their postings at the time of joining and that their transfer requests were considered on merit. However, the tribunal dismissed this justification, pointing out that employees should not be forced to choose between career growth and family life.