SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2024 Supreme(Online)(CAT) 12769

CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
Jayesh V. Bhairavia, Member (J), Hukum Singh Meena, Member (A)
Sagar Pradhan – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
O.A. No.94 OF 2024



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Joy Mathew
For the Respondents: R R Patel

Judicial review of government servant transfers limited to malafides or statutory violations; no vested right to specific posting; policy-compliant orders not interfered with despite family claims.

Headnote:(A) Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 - Section 19 - Transfer of government servant - Scope of judicial review limited to malafides or violation of statutory rules - No interference with transfer orders made in public interest and for administrative reasons unless vitiated by mala fides - Government servant has no vested right to particular posting - Transfer incident of service career - Applicant’s case considered by Transfer Committee awarding points for spouse ground and posting to fourth choice station per policy after tenure completion on sensitive side - No legal infirmity found (Paras 10, 10.1 to 10.6).

(B) Transfer policy - Compliance with guidelines mandatory - Rotation between sensitive and non-sensitive posts required - Preferences submitted voluntarily considered by committee - Family circumstances including spouse posting and pregnancy to be represented post-compliance with transfer order - Competent authority expected to consider Article 21 aspects on representation (Paras 9, 9.1, 12).

Facts of the case:
Applicant challenged transfer order from sensitive to non-sensitive post after completing three-year tenure, claiming violation of interim stay from prior proceedings, non-consideration of spouse ground (wife pregnant, both central government employees), and non-placement before committee per Supreme Court directive. Respondents defended transfer per CLS guidelines, noting applicant’s station preferences including transferee location, 20 points awarded for spouse, and committee recommendation based on vacancies.

Findings of Court:
Transfer order upheld as compliant with policy; interim relief vacated; applicant directed to comply and represent further grievances to competent authority.

Issues: Whether transfer violated interim order, ignored spouse/family grounds, bypassed committee procedure; scope of interference in administrative transfers.

Ratio Decidendi: Courts/Tribunals should not interfere with transfers absent malafides or statutory violation; policy followed including spouse consideration; employee must report to new post before litigating personal issues.

Result: Original Application dismissed.

Table of Content
1. background of transfer orders and interim stays. (Para 1 , 2 , 3)
2. applicant's challenge on policy violation and family grounds. (Para 4 , 5)
3. respondents' defense via transfer policy compliance. (Para 6 , 7)
4. court finds policy and spouse grounds considered. (Para 8 , 9)
5. limited judicial review of transfers absent mala fides. (Para 10)
6. no infirmity; applicant to represent post-compliance. (Para 11 , 12)
7. oa dismissed; interim relief vacated. (Para 13 , 14)

ORDER

Hon’ble Mr. Jayesh V. Bhairavia, Member (J):

The applicant, being aggrieved with the order dated 19.2.2024 (Annexure A/1 refer) issued by the respondent No.2, i.e., the Under Secretary, Ministry of Labour and Employment, New Delhi vide which transferring 30 officers, including the applicant to different places,as the applicant has been transferred from RLC(C), Vadodara to DWC(C), Karimnagar, Hyderabad, has filed the present Original Application on 14.3.2024 under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 before this Tribunal seeking the following reliefs:-

“(A) Quashing and setting aside the impugned order dated 19.2.2024 passed by the respondents at Annexure A/1, qua the applicant,

(B) Directing the respondents to allow the applicant to continue to perform his duties at Vadodara, present place of posting, and

(C) Passing any other appropriate order.”

2. At the outset, it is required to mention that this Tribunal by taking into consideration the grounds stated in the instant OA has passed the following interim order dated 15.3.2024:-

“Heard on the question of admission as well as on the interim relief.

The applicant is challenging the impugned order dated 19.02.2024 (Annexure A/1) by which he has been transferred from RLC(C), Vadodara to DWC(C), Karimnagar, Hyderabad. It is the contention of the applicant that the order dated 31.08.2023 (Annexure A/2) was passed by the competent authority by which he had been transferred from the RLC(C) Vadodara to DL,WC(C) Pulgaon, Wardha. The said order is the subject matter of challenge before this Tribunal in OA No.264/2023 in which this Tribunal had passed order of 'Stay' on 04.09.2023. The said interim relief is still continuing. In spite of the aforesaid, the impugned order has been passed. It was further submitted that before passing the impugned order, the mandatory requirement is to place the proposal of transfer before the Transfer & Placement Committee in terms of the order passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court.

Considering the submissions, the applicant has able to make out prima facie case for grant of interim relief. Therefore, issue notice against the admission and interim relief to the respondents, returnable by 25.04.2024. Meanwhile, operation of impugned order dated 19.02.2024 (Annexure A/1) so far it relates to the applicant, it is stayed till the next date. It is further directed that the applicant shall be permitted to work at RLC(C), Vadodara.”

3. Further, it is apt to mention that since at the relevant time the applicant though had not completed his three years tenure at Sensitive Side i.e. Vodadora, he was ordered to be transferred by the respondents vide order 31.08.2023 from the RLC(C) Vadodara to DL,WC(C) Pulgaon, Wardha and being aggrieved, the applicant herein had filed OA No.264/2023. This Tribunal, thus by way of interim relief in favour of the applicant dated 4.9.2023 in the said OA. Further it emerges from the records that during the pendency of the said OA, the applicant had completed his tenure at Vadodara and as such he had submitted his application and choice of stations of transfer in terms of transfer policy/guidelines stipulated in OM dated 10.1.2024. After considering the same the respondents have issued another transfer order dated 19.02.2024 (Annexure A/1) whereby the applicant has been now ordered to be transferred from RLC(C), Vadodara to DWC(C), Karimnagar, Hyderabad. Hence this OA.

4. During the course of hearing, learned counsel for the applicant submitted that t

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top