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

2026 Supreme(Online)(CAT) 1557

CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
Krishna Mohan Jha – Appellant
Versus
M/o Railways – Respondent
O.A./827/2018



##PAGE1##

1

(Reserved on 09.01.2026)

CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL

JABALPUR BENCH

(Circuit Sitting at Bilaspur)

Indore this the 05th day of February, 2026

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE AKHIL KUMAR SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER

HON’BLE MRS. MALLIKA ARYA, ADMINISTRATIVE MEMBER

Original Application No. 827 of 2018

1. Krishna Mohan Jha, S/o Late Murlidhar Jha, Aged about 48

years, employed as SSE (Works), SECR/BSP, R/o Nutan

Kunj, Tirupati Nagar, Hemunagar, Bilaspur – 495004 (CG).

2. Abodh Kumar, S/o Shri Ram Yatan Sah, Aged about 38

years, employed as SSE (Works), SECR/BSP, R/o Rly. Qrt.

No. 1376/2, Wireless Colony, Bilaspur – 495004 (CG).

…….Applicants

V E R S U S

Union of India through the General Manager, S.E.C Railway,

Bilaspur Zone, Headquarters’ Office, Bilaspur – 495004 (CG).

1.

The Senior Divisional Personnel Officer, SEC Railway,

Bilaspur Division, DRM’s Office, Bilaspur – 495004 (CG).

2.

Mr. Aditya Kumar (PF05642607) working as SSE (Works)

Siding/Bilaspur (Special) under DEN/Siding, S.E.C. Railway,

3.

Bilaspur – 495004 (CG).

4. Mr. J.P. Pateria (PF07980048) working as SSE (Works)

North/Bilaspur (Incharge) under ADEN/Settelment, S.E.C.

Railway, Bilaspur – 495004 (CG).

5. Mr. Pradeep Kumar (PF06175132) working as SSE (Works)

Umariya/(Incharge) under ADEN/S.E.C. Railway, Umariya

(MP).

Page 1 of 6

ANAND 2026.02.10

PRAKASH 14:09:34

DUBEY +05'30'

##PAGE2##

2

6. Mr. M.K. Gupta (PF09795531) working as SSE (Works)

Special/Bilaspur under ADEN/Settlement II/ S.E.C. Railway,

Bilaspur – 495004 (CG).

7. Mr. Rajesh Prasad Rana (PF09AB0472) working as SSE

(Works) Shahdol (Incharge) under ADEN, S.E.C. Railway,

Shahdol – MP. ……Respondents

Advocate for the applicant: Shri B.P. Rao

Advocate for the respondents: Shri Palas Tiwari

O R D E R

By Akhil Kumar Srivastava, JM-

The applicants are aggrieved by the order dated 08.05.2018

(Annexure A-2) by which the respondents issued intra divisional

transfer on administrative grounds. Referring to a provisional

seniority list as on 01.04.2017 (Annexure A-1), the learned counsel

for the applicants submitted that despite the fact that the applicant

no. 1 is senior to private respondents no. 3 to 7 and applicant no. 2

being senior to respondent no. 7, the respondents have posted the

respondent nos. 3 to 7 as In-charge of a Unit or Special of a

Branch/Unit, therefore, the applicants being senior to them are

bound to work under them and have also special powers to

discharge duties at his own will and discretion. The learned counsel

for the applicants further submitted that there must be a criteria

while posting the SSE/In-charge or SSE/Special and only seniors to

be posted on In-charge or Special. In this regard, the learned

Page 2 of 6

ANAND 2026.02.10

PRAKASH 14:09:34

DUBEY +05'30'

##PAGE3##

3

counsel for the applicants submitted that before posting any SSE as

In-charge or Special, the respondents ought to have invited

applications from eligible and willing SSE which they have not

followed and thus the action of the respondents is unjust, arbitrary

and illogical and adopted pick and choose policy while issuing the

order dated 08.05.2018 and prayed to quash the same.

2. On the other hand, referring to the contents of reply the

learned counsel for the respondents submitted that transfer and

posting of an employee comes under the purview of the

administration and the decision of the competent authority is based

on the requirement of administrative needs. Learned counsel for the

respondents further submitted that the SSE/Special has to

discharge his duties as per requirement of the special work under

the concerned Assistant Divisional Engineer and has no special

powers to discharge duties as his will, as stated by the applicants.

Learned counsel for the respondents also contended that the

seniority is applicable for promotion and not for transfer and posting

therefore, it is not required to see seniority while issuing transfer

and posting orders. Learned counsel for the respondents further

submitted that there is no rule in Transfer and Posting Policy to

invite applications from eligible and willing

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
whatsapp-icon Back to top