( 1. ) THE first respondent was working as a Trained Graduate Teacher (Sanskrit) at Kendriya Vidyalaya No. 2, Bhopal. He was placed under suspension pending enquiry by the third petitioner, by order dated 13-7-2001, with a stipulation that his headquarter during the suspension will be Kendriya Vidyalaya, Bairagarh, Bhopal. Subsequently, a charge-sheet dated 16-10-2001 was issued alleging misbehaviour with the Principal Shri A. K. Katiyar.

( 2. ) THE first respondent appealed against the order of suspension on 5-11-2001 to the second petitioner. The second petitioner after considering the appeal, passed an order dated 6/8-7-2002, under Rule 10 (5) (c) of the CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965, revoking the suspension of the first respondent and posting him to K. V. , Karimganj, Assam, with effect from the date he joins duty at K. V. , Karimganj, without prejudice to the disciplinary proceedings pending against him.

( 3. ) THE said order of the Appellate Authority, was followed by a memo dated 9/12-8-2002 issued by Education Officer (Vigilance) attached to the first petitioner, calling upon the first respondent to get himself relieved from K. V. , Bairagarh immediately and join at K. V. , Karimganj within 15 days and that failing compliance, the suspension will continue. Feeling aggrieved, the first respondent approached the Central Administrative Tribunal, Jabalpur in O. A. No. 487/2002 for quashing that part of the order dated 6/8-7-2002 by which he was transferred to K. V. , Karimganj in Assam and the condition that his suspension will be revoked on joining at K. V. , Karimganj. The Tribunal by order dated 6-8-2002 disposed of the matter with a direction to consider representation dated 10-7-2002 submitted by the first respondent in respect of his transfer to K. V. , Karimganj, within four weeks by a speaking order. The Tribunal also directed that till disposal of the representation, the order dated 6/8-7-2002 to the extent it posted first respondent to K. V. , Karimganj shall remain stayed. In compliance with the said order, the first petitioner passed a speaking order dated 6-9-2002 reiterating that the revocation of suspension and posting first respondent at K. V. , Karimganj was neither malafide nor colourable exercise of power and was done in administrative exigencies. It was also observed that the services of employees of the Kendriya Vidyalayas are transferable all over the country in administrative exigencies. Consequently, the representation dated 10-7-2002 was rejected. In pursuance of it, the first respondent was relieved on 11-9-2002 from K. V. , Bairagarh with a direction to report to duty to Principal K. V. , Karimganj.

( 4. ) THE first respondent thereafter again approached the Tribunal in O. A. No. 648/2002 for quashing the order dated 6/8-7-2002 to the extent it made the revocation of suspension subject to his reporting to duty at K. V. , Karimganj and also praying for quashing of the consequential orders dated 9/12-8-2002, 6-9-2002 and 11-9-2002. He also sought a direction to petitioners to treat him as having being reinstated at Bhopal and to continue him at Bhopal without subjecting him to any harassment or victimization by shifting or transfer.

( 5. ) THE Tribunal by order dated 6-5-2003 allowed the said application. The Tribunal held that an order of transfer can not be clubbed with an order revoking suspension. It also held that Rule 10 read with the format of order of revocation of suspension did not contemplate revocation being linked or coupled with any transfer. The Tribunal held that when a person is suspended, his lien is maintained on the post from which he was suspended and after revocation of suspension, he automatically stands reinstated on that post from which he was suspended and only thereafter any question of transfer will have to be considered, if required, in administrative exigencies. The Tribunal, therefore, allowed the petition and quashed the order dated 6/8-7-2002 in so far as it posted firs