CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI OA 191/2026 This the 19th day of January, 2026.

Hon’ble Mr. Sanjeeva Kumar, Member (A)

Hon'ble Mr. Ajay Pratap Singh, Member (J)

Radha Kishan Joshi @ R.K. Joshi Son of Shri Parmanand Joshi (Aged about 58 years)

[Posted as DSP in CBI, Pune]

House No.27, Block-04, Ground Floor, Ganesh Temple Street, Phule Nagar, Pune, Maharashtra-411006.

…Applicants (By Advocate:-Mr. Avadh Bihari Kaushik)

Versus Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), (Through its director)

Plot No. 5-B, 6th Floor, CGO Complex, Lodhi Road, New Delhi-110003 …Respondent (By Advocate: Mr. Hanu Bhaskar)

O R D E R (ORAL)

As per: Ajay Pratap Singh, Member (Judicial)

The applicant is working as Deputy Superintendent of Police in CBI in Anti-Corruption Branch and by way of the present OA has invoked the jurisdiction of this Tribunal under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, seeking main relief(s) [As extracted from the OA] reads as:

(i) This Hon'ble Tribunal may graciously be pleased to pass an order thereby directing the respondent to forthwith consider the applicant's requests (ANNEXURE-A-11) to transfer him from CBI-Pune to CBI-Ghaziabad in terms respondent's own transfer policy (ANNEXURE-A-1) expeditiously and without any delay, in a time-bound manner.

(ii) Any other relief, order or directions which this Hon'ble Tribunal considers just and fit may also be passed in the interest of justice.”

2. The learned counsel for the applicant contended that the applicant has been transferred from Port Blair to Pune in the year 2025 and thereafter, the applicant made a representation dated 06.10.2025 to consider his request for transfer from Pune to Ghaziabad, New Delhi in light of the transfer policy as he is going to superannuate on 11.02.2027. The said representation has not been decided yet.

3. Issue notice to the respondents.

4. Mr. Hanu Bhaskar, the learned counsel appears through VC on advance service, accepts notice and service of notice to the respondents is waived off.

5. The learned counsel appearing for the applicant, after arguing for some time, submits that the applicant would be satisfied if respondents are directed to consider and decide the pending representation dated 06.10.2025 and 04.12.2025 [Annexure A-11 (colly)] of the applicant in light of the transfer policy applicant in the case of the applicant in a stipulated time frame

6. The learned counsels for the respondents fairly submits that though the applicant has been transferred from Port Blair to Pune recently, the pending representation dated 06.10.2025 and 04.12.2025 [Annexure A-11 (colly)] of the applicant shall be considered by the respondents in accordance with the applicable transfer policy and extant rules.

7. Heard with consent. In view of above, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, we deem it just and proper that principles of natural justice would be met and hereby direct the competent authority amongst the respondents to consider and decided the pending representation dated 06.10.2025 and 04.12.2025 [Annexure A-11 (colly)] as expeditiously as possible and preferably within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of order passed today by passing a reasoned and speaking order.

8. Needless to say, we have not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case and respondents are free to decide pending representation in accordance with law.

9. In view whereof, the present OA stands disposed of at admission stage itself in above indicated terms.

10. Resultantly, pending MA(s), if any, also stands disposed of.

11. However, there shall be no order as to costs.

(Ajay Pratap Singh) (Sanjeeva Kumar)

Member (J) Member (A)

/ abhay/