Judgement (Oral):

1. Heard Mr. M. Dutta, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. J. K. Goswami, learned Standing Counsel, Animal Husbandry and Veterinary Department for respondent Nos. 1, 3, 4 & 5 and Mr. A. Phukan, learned Standing Counsel, General Administration Department for respondent No. 2.

2. Challenge made in this writ petition is to the order dated 12.07.2025, issued by the Director, Animal Husbandry & Veterinary Department, Government of Assam, whereby the mutual transfer order dated 07.06.2025 of the petitioners has been cancelled being in purported contravention of the provision of Clause 3 (point b) of Office Memorandum dated 01.01.2025.

3. Briefly put, the petitioners were appointed as Junior Assistants under the Directorate of Animal Husbandry & Veterinary, Govt. of Assam, vide order dated 23.05.2023 on the recommendation of the State Level Recruitment Commission pursuant to an advertisement for filling up of 13,141 various posts including 8,331 under Category- I (Accountant/Cashier/Jr. Asstt./LDA/ Stenographer etc. The petitioner No. 1 was posted at the Directorate of Animal Husbandry & Veterinary, Chenikuthi, Guwahati vide order dated 23.05.2023. By another order on the same day, the petitioner No. 2 was posted in the office of the District Animal Husbandry & Veterinary Officer, Darrang, Mangaldoi, District Darrang.

4. The Government of Assam, in the General Administration Department, issued an Office Memorandum dated 01.01.2025 through the Commissioner & Secretary to the Government of Assam, prescribing the Standard Operating Procedure for mutual transfer (intra-departmental) of Grade-III and Grade-IV employees. Clause 3 of the said Office Memorandum stipulates that mutual transfer between two employees of the same Department and the same Directorate/Commissionerate shall be allowed only if both of them have the same grade pay, covered under the same Service Rules, and the nature and qualification of both posts are similar.

5. Both the petitioners had applied for mutual transfer in terms of the Office Memorandum dated 01.01.2025. The Director of Animal Husbandry & Veterinary, Assam, by an order dated 07.06.2025, in terms of the said Office Memorandum dated 01.01.2025, transferred and posted the petitioner No. 1 from the Directorate of Animal Husbandry & Veterinary Department, Assam, Kamrup(M), to the Office of the District Animal Husbandry & Veterinary, Mangoldoi, Darrang, under the Directorate of Animal Husbandry and Veterinary, Darrang. The petitioner No. 2 was correspondingly transferred and posted from the Office of the District Animal Husbandry & Veterinary Officer, Darrang, under the Directorate of Animal Husbandry and Veterinary, Darrang, to the Directorate of Animal Husbandry & Veterinary Department, Assam, Kamrup(M), on mutual basis. Pursuant thereto, both petitioners were released from their respective offices and joined at their new places of posting. However, by the impugned order dated 17.07.2025, the respondent authorities cancelled the said mutual transfer on the purported ground that the same is in contravention of the provisions under Clause 3 (point b) of the Office Memorandum dated 01.01.2025.

6. Mr. M. Dutta, learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that since both the petitioners have been appointed as Junior Assistant under the Assam Directorate Establishment (Ministerial) Service Rules, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as “Directorate Service Rules, 1973” for short) by the Director of Animal Husbandry & Veterinary, Government of Assam, pursuant to an advertisement for filling up of various posts, their mutual transfer was validly effected in terms of the Office Memorandum dated 01.01.2025, which permits mutual transfer between two employees of the same Department and the same Directorate/Commissionerate if both are governed by the same Service Rules.

7. He submits that the respondent authority, without any justification, has cancelled the duly effected mutual transfer order by erroneously observing that the same is in contravention of the aforesaid Office Memorandum. The respondent authorities, by way of an affidavit, have attempted to justify the impugned cancellation order on the ground that petitioner No. 2, having been posted in a District Office, would be governed by the District Service Rules, 1967. However, such interpretation is wholly misconceived, as mere posting of petitioner No. 2 to a District Office under the same Directorate does not alter the fact that both petitioners were appointed under and are governed by the Directorate Service Rules, 1973, as the Rules clearly defines the appointing authority and the district establishment and the respondents have misinterpreted these provisions. Therefore, he submits that the impugned order dated 12.07.2025 is not sustainable in law and is liable to be set aside.

8. Per contra, Mr. J. K. Goswami, learned Standing Counsel for the Animal Husbandry & Veterinary Department, submits that the Directorate Service Rules, 1973 initially applies to both the petitioners. The posts of Junior Assistant, Senior Assistant, Superintendent and Registrar under the Directorate of Animal Husbandry & Veterinary Department are governed by the Directorate Service Rules, 1973. However, the Junior Assistant/Senior Assistant serving under the District Establishment are not governed by the said Directorate Service Rules, 1973, but are instead governed by the Assam Ministerial District Establishment Service Rules, 1967 (hereinafter referred to as “District Service Rules, 1967” for short). He submits that the petitioner No. 2 having been posted at District Office, though under the Directorate of Animal Husbandry & Veterinary is under the District Establishment, her service shall be governed by the District Service Rules, 1967 as the Rules clearly provide that the District Establishment includes all non-gazetted ministerial staff in the offices of the Deputy Commissioner, Sub- Divisional Officers and Sub-Deputy Collectors of the District, with a note clarifying that the offices of the Deputy Commissioner and Sub-divisional Officers include branches like Supply, Textile, Election, Revenue, Excise, Development and other general branches.

9. While stressing on the expression “other general branches,” he vehemently submits that the District Office of the Animal Husbandry & Veterinary Department, would fall within the meaning of “other general branches.” Therefore, the services of the petitioner No. 2 would be governed by the District Service Rules, 1967, unlike the petitioner No. 1, whose service is governed by the Directorate Service Rules, 1973. That apart, both the petitioner Nos. 1 & 2 have been posted under separate orders, whereby the petitioner No. 1 has been posted under the Directorate Office at Kamrup (M) and the petitioner No. 2 in the District Office at Darang under the Directorate of Animal Husbandry & Veterinary. Therefore, the Director, upon realizing that the mutual transfer order dated 07.06.2025 having been issued in contravention of provisions of the Office Memorandum dated 01.01.2025, particularly Clause 3 (point b), as the petitioners being governed by different Service Rules, has rightly cancelled the said mutual transfer order and as such, no interference is called for.

10. I have considered the submissions of learned counsel for the parties and also perused the materials available on record.

11. The Commissioner and Secretary to the Government of Assam, General Administration Department, vide Office Memorandum dated 01.01.2025, has issued the Standard Operating Procedure for mutual transfer of Garde-III & IV employees in the State. The said policy, inter alia, provides that the mutual transfer between two employees of the same Department and the same Directorate/Commissionerate shall be permissible only if both the employees have same grade pay, covered under same Service Rules and the nature and qualification requirements of both posts are similar.

12. Undisputedly, the petitioners were appointed as Junior Assistants pursuant to an advertisement issued for filling up of 13,141 various posts, including 8,331 post under Category-I (Accountant/Cashier/Jr. Asstt./LDA/Stenographer etc.) under the Directorate of Animal Husbandry & Veterinary.

13. The petitioner No. 1 was posted at the office of the Directorate of animal husbandry & Veterinary, Kamrup(M), Guwahati, and by a separate order issued on the same day, the petitioner No. 2 was posted to the Office of the District Animal Husbandry & Veterinary Officer under the Directorate of Animal Husbandry & Veterinary, Mangaldoi, District Darrang. Pursuant to their request for mutual transfer in terms of the Office Memorandum dated 01.01.2025, the petitioner No. 1 was transferred to Darrang District in the Office of the District Veterinary Officer and the petitioner No. 2 was correspondingly transferred to Kamrup (M), Guwahati on mutual basis.

14. The services of the petitioners, admittedly, would be governed by the Directorate Service Rules, 1973, which regulates the recruitment and service conditions of the persons appointed to the ministerial service in the various offices of the Heads of Departments under the Government of Assam.

15. The other Rules, i.e. District Service Rules, 1967, governs the recruitment and condition of service of persons appointed to the Assam Ministerial District Establishment services.

16. The Directorate Service Rules, 1973 is a Rule applicable to the ministerial staff of the offices of the Heads of Departments mentioned in column (1) of the Schedule I. Column (1) of the Schedule I provides the Heads of Departments and appointing authorities of the respective department. At Sl. No. 13, the Director of Animal Husbandry and Veterinary Department is included as one of the Heads of Departments.

17. Rule 2(a) defines appointing authority which means the Chief Secretary to the Government of Assam in the Secretariat Administrative (Establishment- Gazetted Cell) Department in respect of the post of Administrative Officer, the Secretary to the Government of Assam in the Department as indicated under column (2) of the Schedule I in respect of the post of Registrar and Superintendent, and Head of Department i.e Director, as indicated under column (1) of the Schedule I in respect of posts of Senior Assistant and Junior Assistant. The term “District Offices” is also defined in the Rules to mean and include the different district offices of District Officers and other offices declared as such under the controlling authority of the officer as indicated under column (1) of the Schedule I.

18. Rule 2 of District Service Rules, 1967 defines the appointing authority to mean the Commissioner & Secretary to the Government of Assam to the Government of Assam, General Administration (B) Department, the Secretary to the Government of Assam General Administration (B) Department in case of appointment to the post of Administrative Officer and Revenue Sheristadar and the Deputy Commissioner in the case of appointments to all other ministerial posts under the District Establishment. The term “District Establishment” is defined to include all non-gazetted ministerial staff in the offices of the Deputy Commissioner, Sub-Divisional Officers and Sub-Deputy Collectors of the District. A Note appended to the definition further clarifies that the Offices of the Deputy Commissioner and Sub-Divisional Officers shall include branches like Supply, Textile, Election, Revenue, Excise, Development and other general branches.

19. The petitioners having been appointed under the Directorate Service Rules 1973, their service conditions would undoubtedly be governed by the said Rules as they are employees of the Directorate, irrespective of their places of posting, even if such posting is to a District Office under the same Directorate. On the other hand, the District Service Rules, 1967 regulate the service conditions of the ministerial staff appointed by the Deputy Commissioner in case of an employee appointed as ministerial staff in the District Establishment.

20. In the District Services, Rules, 1967, “District Establishment” is defined to include all non-gazetted ministerial staff in the Office of the Deputy Commissioner, Sub-Divisional Officer and Sub-Deputy Collectors of the District, which shall include branches like Supply, Textile, Election, Revenue, Excise, Development and other general branches. The expression “other general branches” must necessarily be understood to refer to branches which is not specifically mentioned but the branches of departments where the ministerial staffs have been appointed by the Deputy Commissioner, who being the appointing authority as defined under Rule 2(1)(b) of the District Service Rules, 1967.

21. In the present case, it is undisputed that the petitioner No. 2, although posted in a District Office of the Animal Husbandry & Veterinary Officer at Mangaldai, Darrang District, has been appointed under the Directorate Service Rules, 1973, along with petitioner No. 1, pursuant to the same advertisement and under the same Directorate of Animal Husbandry and Veterinary. As a natural corollary, the services of the petitioners are regulated by the Directorate Service Rules, 1973 having the same grade pay, covered under the same service rules, and possessing similar nature and qualification of posts. Thus, in my unhesitant view, their mutual transfer was validly effected in terms of the Office Memorandum dated 01.01.2025 and there is no contravention of the said Office Memorandum.

22. Regard being had to the strenuous submissions advanced by Mr. J. K. Goswami, learned Standing Counsel, Animal Husbandry & Veterinary Department, this Court, upon careful consideration, finds that the interpretation sought to be placed by the learned counsel is wholly misconceived as the expression “other general branches” occurring in the definition of the District Service Rules, 1967, refers only to branches of offices where the ministerial staff are appointed by the Deputy Commissioner, who is the appointing authority for ministerial posts in the District Establishment. The posting of a ministerial employee under the Directorate, whose appointment and service conditions are governed by the Directorate Service Rules, 1973, to an office in the district under the Directorate cannot be construed to mean that such employee would be an employee of the District Establishment or his service is regulated by the District Service Rules, 1967.

23. The appointing authority in the present case remains the Director of Animal Husbandry & Veterinary, as reflected in Schedule I of the Directorate Service Rules, 1973, and not the Deputy Commissioner. Thus, the contention of the learned Standing Counsel, Animal Husbandry & Veterinary Department, is considered but only for rejection as it is clear as noon day that the appointments and service conditions of the petitioners are governed by the Directorate Service Rules, 1973 and not by the District Service Rules, 1967, which apply exclusively to the ministerial staff appointed by the Deputy Commissioner under the District Establishment.

24. In view of the discussions made hereinabove, this Court is of the considered view that the respondent authority, namely, the Director, Animal Husbandry & Veterinary Department, Government of Assam, has misinterpreted Clause 3 (point b) of the Office Memorandum dated 01.01.2025 in holding that the mutual transfer of the petitioners is in contravention of the said Office Memorandum and has thereby illegally cancelled the said mutual transfer dated 07.06.2025 on the premise that the appointment and service conditions of the petitioners are governed by the District Service Rules, 1967, whereas both the petitioners are governed by the Directorate Service Rules, 1973. Therefore, the mutual transfer is in consonance with the Office Memorandum dated 01.01.2025, which permits mutual transfer between two employees if covered under the same Service Rules.

25. Accordingly, the impugned order dated 12.07.2025, issued by the Director, Animal Husbandry & Veterinary Department, Government of Assam, is hereby set aside and quashed. Consequently, the mutual transfer order dated 07.06.2025 stands revived and the petitioners shall be allowed to join their respective places of posting in terms of the said mutual transfer.

26. Writ petition stands allowed and disposed of. Cost (s) made easy.