The Kerala High Court has intervened in a dispute over the transfer of a KSRTC (Kerala State Road Transport Corporation) driver, Jaimon Joseph, after a “bottle row” in which empty water bottles were found in the cabin of the bus he was operating. The transfer, ordered by KSRTC management following a complaint raised by the State Transport Minister, K.B. Ganesh, was challenged by Joseph before the High Court.
On October 1, while a fast passenger bus was in transit from Mundakayam to Thiruvananthapuram, the Transport Minister allegedly stopped the vehicle at Ayoor and found it in an “unclean” condition, with empty plastic bottles lined against the front glass within the driver’s cabin. He thereafter publicly intervened, directing that action be taken against those responsible. Soon thereafter, Joseph was transferred from the Ponkunnam depot in Kottayam district to the Pudukkad depot in Thrissur district. The transfer order cited “administrative convenience” as its justification, and did not elaborate on specific findings or disciplinary reasoning.
Joseph contested the transfer, maintaining that he had always served without any prior disciplinary record since joining KSRTC in 2016. He argued that his placement of two bottles was a function of his need to stay hydrated during a long route run (of approximately 8 hours and over 210 km) and absence of suitable storage within the bus cabin. He submitted that the transfer lacked reasoned justification, was punitive in nature, and may have been at the minister’s behest.
During the hearing, the High Court bench led by Justice N. Nagaresh orally expressed serious concern over the propriety of the transfer. Characterizing the decision as having “shocked conscience,” the court observed that the presence of water bottles—rather than liquor bottles—did not, on its face, justify punitive action. The court asked: if every minor administrative infraction warrants transfer, then the power becomes arbitrary. It noted that for a transfer to be valid, there must be reasoned public interest, an assessment of whether keeping the employee at his station would interfere with ongoing disciplinary proceedings, or likelihood of influencing witnesses—mere administrative whims cannot suffice.
The High Court pressed KSRTC to explain the justification for transferring Joseph, and whether a transfer was the only recourse rather than remedial or corrective action. The court acknowledged that KSRTC may issue circulars prohibiting employees from placing bottles or personal items near the windshield; a June 2024 circular was referenced, but Joseph’s counsel argued it applied only to Super Delux buses, not the fast passenger class. The court showed sympathy toward Joseph’s arguments that the transfer order lacked sufficient reasoning and that he was “shunted far away” the way it was imposed.
The court reserved its decision to a future date, signaling that it may set aside the transfer if it finds no valid basis. The outcome is expected to confirm that disciplinary transfers must be justified, reasoned, and proportionate, rather than imposed arbitrarily over minor infractions.
0 Comments
Thank you for your response. It will help us to improve in the future.