Judgment

1. The challenge in this petition is to the Order dated 31.05.2021 passed in OA/807/2021 by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Jammu Bench, at Jammu (hereafter for short “Tribunal”) in case titled Dr. Anil Gupta Vs. UT of J&K and others whereby the prayer of the petitioner for grant of interim relief seeking stay of Govt. Order No. 80-ASH of 2021 dated 11.05.2021 passed by respondent No.2 rejecting his representation as also the implementation of Govt. Order No. 72-ASH of 2021 dated 29.04.2021 passed by respondent No.2, transferring the petitioner from the post of Incharge Poultry Geneticist, Jammu and shifting him to look after the work of Joint Director, IAH & BP Zakura and Chief Executive Officer, Livestock Development Board, Kashmir.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that being aggrieved of Govt. Order No.80-ASH of 2021 dated 11.05.2021 and Govt. Order No.72-ASH of 2021 dated 29.04.2021, the petitioner approached the Central Administrative Tribunal, Jammu for staying the operation of both the orders, inter alia, on the grounds that in terms of the Transfer Policy notified vide Government Order No.861-GAD of 2010 dated 28.07.2010 the petitioner has not completed his tenure of two years and has been transferred prematurely. It is averred that Transfer Policy notified vide Government Order No.861-GAD of 2010 dated 28.07.2010, which, among others, provides for minimum tenure of two years of Government servant at one place of posting, but, in the present case the petitioner has been transferred just after 11 months; and, moreover, there are no special circumstances, which warrant premature transfer of the petitioner. It is also contended that the impugned order qua the petitioner, on the face of it, is contrary to the transfer policy formulated by the Government and is also bad on the ground that no proper procedure, provided under Transfer Policy for premature transfer, has been followed by the respondents.

3. After hearing learned counsel for the parties, the Tribunal has rejected the prayer of the petitioner for grant of interim relief as the Tribunal has found that petitioner has already been relieved from his place of posting and another officer has already taken the charge of the post, held by the petitioner at Jammu, therefore, the Tribunal was of the view that no prima facie case was made out for staying the operation of the impugned orders. However, it was observed that looking to the grounds taken by the petitioner in the OA against his transfer the case was directed to be listed again on 07.07.2021 as the same required early disposal.

4. By virtue of instant petition, the petitioner has questioned the orders impugned, amongst other, on the grounds that the Tribunal has failed to appreciate the office record as well as pleadings besides specific ground taken by the petitioner of violation of Transfer Policy while passing the order impugned; that the orders impugned are liable to be set aside as the same are against the mandate of transfer policy, which contains a stipulation that the minimum tenure of government employee on a particular post shall be of two years and maximum of three years; that the premature transfers, wherever unavoidable in the interest of administration, shall be ordered with the prior approval of the Minister Incharge that too for the reasons to be recorded and the said Transfer Policy has attained statutory flavour after the issuance of SRO 307 which specifically prescribes that every transfer shall be ordered in accordance with the provisions of Jammu and Kashmir Government Business Rules and Transfer Policy notified vide Govt. Order No.861-GAD of 2010 dated 28.07.2010.

5. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents, Mr. K.D.S. Kotwal, Dy. AG submits that another officer has joined the post held by the petitioner and is performing duties on the said post from the date of his joining and the petitioner has been relieved. He further submits that the Tribunal has