The Tribunal held that transfer orders are routine administrative functions and should not be interfered with unless shown to be arbitrary or in violation of established policies.

ORDER

Mr. Anil Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the applicants and Mr. Raghvendra Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the respondents are present and heard.

2. The present Original Application has been filed challenging the impugned transfer order dated 19.07.2017 and consequential relieving order dated 18.08.2017. Upon initial consideration, this Tribunal, vide its interim Order dated 24.08.2017, was pleased to restrain the respondents from giving effect to the said orders so far as they relate to the applicants. The said interim relief remains in operation as on date.

3. The brief facts of the case are that the applicants, all serving as Junior Technical Officers (Scientific Cadre) in DGQA establishments at Kanpur, contend that Scientific Cadre has been kept exempt from Rotational Transfer Policy (RTP) under Ministry of Defence letters dated 24.11.2016 and 10.02.2017. They submit that the impugned transfer orders are contrary to statutory provisions, issued in mid-academic session, without considering spouse grounds or choice postings, and hence liable to be quashed. Reliance is placed upon earlier orders of this Tribunal and other Benches where similarly situated employees were granted protection.

4. Learned counsel for the applicants submitted that, in view of changed circumstances over time, several applicants have either joined at their transferred stations, superannuated, or are still continuing at their present place of posting. He placed reliance upon the earlier decision of this Tribunal dated 22.04.2025 passed in O.A. No. 1010 of 2017, wherein a similarly situated applicant nearing superannuation was extended protection under the Transfer Policy dated 10.02.2017. It is noted that while reliance has been placed upon the said order, this Tribunal has not drawn upon that precedent while disposing of the present OA. The relevant portion of the Order dated 22.04.2025 is reproduced below for reference:-

“Open Court

CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL

ALLAHABAD BENCH

ALLAHABAD

*********

Original Application No. 1010 of 2017

Allahabad this the 22nd day of April, 2025

Hon’ble Mr. Rajnish Kumar Rai, Member-J

1. Anjali Dayal (SA), aged about 45 years, W/o Ravindra Kumar, Resident of SH-123 6^th Floor Chandra Ganga Enclave Pokharpur, Kanpur Jajmau, 208010 CQA (Materials).

2. Mithlesh Kumar JTO (S), aged about 53 years, S/o Late Babu Lal, Resident of House No. 4/233 Purana Kanpur 208002 CQA (Textile &vClothing).

3. Deleted vide Order dated 22.12.2022.

4. Dinesh Kumar Srivastava JTO (S), aged about 56 years, S/o Shri Umesh Chandra Lal, Resident of G-2, Shri Girdhari Apptt 128- 543/13, ‘K’ Block Kidwai Nagar, Kanpur – 208011 CQA (Textile & Clothing).

5. Uma Shanker JTO (S), aged about 50 years, S/o Late Bhikha Ram, Resident of H. No. 90, Amrit Puram, Koyla Nagar, Kanpur Textile & Clothing.

Applicant

By Advocates: Mr. Anil Kumar Singh

Mr. M.K. Upadhyay

Vs.

1. Union of India through its Secretary, Ministry of Defence Production 136, South Block, New Delhi.

2. The Director General of Quality Assurance Government of India Ministry of Defence Production-DGQA, 308-A, D-I Wing, Sena Bhawan New Delhi 110011.

3. The ADDL. DGQA (S) Department of Defence Production- DGQA Q-Block, New Delhi.

4. Controller, Controllerate of Quality Assurance (Materials/Textiles & Clothing) DGQA Stores Complex Ashok Path Kanpur – 208004.

Respondents

By Advocate: Mr. Raghvendra Pratap Singh

ORDER

Shri Anil Kumar Singh, counsel for the applicants and Shri Raghvendra Pratap Singh, counsel for the respondents are present and heard.

2. This O.A. has been filed by the applicants against the impugned transfer