Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2025 Supreme(Online)(CAT) 11226

CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
Sudhi Ranjan Mishra, J, Pramod Kumar Das, A
Umakanta Nayak – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
Original Application | OA No. [not specified]

Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr. S.K.Nayak
For the Respondents: Mr. R.S. Pattnaik

Transfer of government employees is an incident of service governed by administrative discretion, not typically subject to judicial review unless tainted by malafide or statutory violation.

Headnote:(A) Transfer & Placement Policy of GSI, 2016 - The applicant challenged his transfer from GSI, BBSR to GSI, Nagpur alleging violation of transfer policy and health considerations. The Tribunal found the transfer justified on administrative grounds as exceeding the maximum tenure at one location (Para 1, 33).

(B) The principle that transfer is an incident of service and may be executed for administrative exigency, without the requirement of adherence to every executive guideline (Para 22).

(C) Applicant's allegations of malafide and colorable exercise of power were unsubstantiated; the transfer was deemed necessary for public interest (Para 31).

Facts of the case:
The applicant was a Survey Officer posted in Odisha for nearly 33 years, challenged a transfer order issued due to administrative needs, claiming personal hardships due to health (Para 1).

Findings of Court:
The Tribunal concluded no legal or malafide grounds existed to overturn the transfer decision, emphasizing the authority's discretion under the Transfer Policy (Para 32).

Issues: The case examined if the transfer was lawful given the applicant's long tenure and health concerns (Para 1).

Ratio Decidendi: The Tribunal applied the ruling that transfers are at the discretion of administrative authorities, not subject to judicial review unless proven to be illegal or in bad faith (Paras 10, 34).

Result: The Original Application was dismissed; interim relief granted was vacated (Para 34).

Table of Content
1. introduction of parties and case overview. (Para 1 , 2)
2. applicant's challenge to transfer order and respondents' counterarguments. (Para 3 , 4 , 5)
3. applicant's reliance on judicial precedents for support. (Para 6)
4. transfers are administrative in nature; courts should not interfere. (Para 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11)
5. judicial reluctance to interfere in transfer orders based on administrative exigencies. (Para 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23)
6. legal principles reinforcing non-interference in transfer matters. (Para 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28)
7. conclusion on the legality of the transfer decision. (Para 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33)
8. final decision to dismiss the original application. (Para 34)
9. no costs awarded in the case. (Para 35)

ORDER

SUDHI RANJAN MISHRA, MEMBER (J):

Applicant has filed this OA challenging order of his transfer dated 10.09.2024 (A/2) from SU: Odisha, ER, Bhubaneswar to RHQ, CR, Nagpur for the same being violative of transfer policy, sidelining the health ailment of the applicant. The case of the applicant is that he is a Survey Officer working in the office of the Deputy Director General, GSI, BBSR, Odisha (Respondent No.4). But surprisingly the authority without complying with principles of natural justice and in violation of Government guidelines issued the office order dated 10.09.2024 (A/2) transfer the applicant from GSI, Bhubaneswar to GSI, Nagpur. It is submitted by the applicant that against the injustice caused to him in the decision making process of the mater, on 28.10.2024 (A/3), for his personal difficulties and ill health, applicant submitted representation with request to consider his case sympathetically on humanitarian ground by cancelling his transfer to GSI, Nagpur and allow him to continue his work in GSI, BBSR for some more years. His prayer is as under :-

“i) to allow the Original Application.

ii) To quash the Order No.456/102- G/HRD/Trans(Oths.)2024/20, dated 10.09.2024 under Annexure-A/2 in Kalpeswar Digitaly signed by Kalpeswar Behera DN: cn=Kalpeswar Behera, o=Central Administrative Tribunal respect of the applicant placed at Sl. No.1 of that transfer list;

iii) To pass any further order/orders as deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.”

2. It is stated by the applicant that while issuing notice in the OA, this Tribunal vide order dated 08.11.2024, as an interim measure, directed respondents to maintain status quo as on date in respect of the posting of the applicant till next date which is continuing till date.

3. Respondents filed their counter opposing the prayer made by the applicant. Contention of the respondents is that applicant, presently holding the post of Survey Officer (Group-A, Gazetted) in GSI and posted at SU:Odisha, ER, BBSR. As per the Transfer & Placement Policy of GSI, 2016; there is a provision of transfer of Group-B Gazetted Officer to other Region at the time of promotion to Group-A Gazetted post. It is stated by the respondents that, during his tenure at SU:Odisha, ER, BBSR, he has been promoted to the post of Assistant Survey Officer (Group-B, Gazetted) on 25.09.2018 and thereafter to the post of Survey Officer (Group-A, Gazetted) on 15.02.2022. However, the applicant was retained at SU: Odisha , ER, BBSR during his promotion to the Group- A post. It is stated that Kalpeswar Digitaly signed by Kalpeswar Behera DN: cn=Kalpeswar Behera, o=Central Administrative Tribunal the tenure of an officer shall be minimum for a period of 4 years, to a maximum of 5 years at a single location and no officer will be allowed to work at single station for more than two spells (Maximum tenure). Since his joining in GSI from 23/01/1992, he has been posted at SU: Odisha, ER, Bhubaneswar for last 32 years and 09 months without a single transfer. Further, out of these 32 years and 09 months tenure, he has served for more than 06 years in Gazetted posts. Thus he has exceeded the maximum allowable tenure at a single location and is t

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2025 Supreme(Online)(CAT) 11226

CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNALSudhi Ranjan Mishra, J, Pramod Kumar Das, AUmakanta Nayak – AppellantVersusUnion of India – RespondentOriginal Application | OA No. [not specified]

Transfer of government employees is an incident of service governed by administrative discretion, not typically subject to judicial review unless tainted by malafide or statutory violation.

CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
Sudhi Ranjan Mishra, J, Pramod Kumar Das, A
Umakanta Nayak – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
Original Application | OA No. [not specified]