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

2026 Supreme(Online)(CAT) 3956

CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
Ramesh Singh Thakur, Member (J)
Lakshay Kumar Chowdhury – Appellant
Versus
Comptroller & Auditor General of India – Respondent
O.A.No.060/1205/2025



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr. Rohit Seth, Mr. Sanjay Kaul, Mr. K. Vinay
For the Respondents: Mr. R.V. Sinha

Transfers violating minimum tenure policy, ignoring caregiver exemptions for disabled dependents, and rejected by non-speaking orders are arbitrary and liable to be quashed absent compelling administrative exigency.

Headnote:(A) Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 - Section 19 - Transfer of service - IA&AS officer transferred within three months of posting violating minimum tenure policy of two years framed pursuant to Supreme Court directions - Caregiver to dependent minor child with serious medical conditions (West Syndrome, cortical visual impairment, developmental delays) undergoing continuous specialized treatment - DoPT OMs dated 06.06.2014 and 17.11.2014 providing exemption from routine transfers for caregivers of disabled dependents - Rejection of representation by non-speaking order without reasons - Held, transfer arbitrary, violative of policy guidelines and principles of natural justice; no compelling administrative exigency demonstrated despite CSB recommendation for newly created post - Impugned orders quashed; retention directed till completion of tenure with liberty to pass fresh reasoned order. (Paras 27-35)

(B) Service jurisprudence - Judicial review of transfer orders - Ordinarily within administrative domain but interference warranted if arbitrary, violative of binding policy, non-application of mind or ignoring compassionate grounds - Minimum tenure ensures stability, continuity and good governance; deviation requires recorded justification. (Paras 27-28, 30)

Facts of the case:
IA&AS officer posted at station vide order dated 08.07.2025, transferred within three months to headquarters against newly created post vide order dated 14.10.2025 and relieved vide order dated 21.10.2025 - Representation citing short tenure, medical needs of minor child under specialized treatment, family hardships and DoPT guidelines rejected by non-speaking order dated 31.10.2025 - Interim stay granted by Tribunal.

Findings of Court:
Transfer policy violated; medical circumstances and caregiver status not meaningfully considered; rejection order unsustainable for lack of reasons; no evidence of overriding administrative exigency.

Issues: Whether impugned transfer, relieving and rejection orders warrant judicial interference on grounds of policy violation, compassionate considerations and procedural infirmities.

Ratio Decidendi: Transfers infringing binding tenure policy, ignoring statutory protections for caregivers of disabled dependents and effected via unreasoned orders are arbitrary; administrative boards' recommendations must reflect fair consideration of individual hardships and policy norms.

Result: Original Application allowed; impugned orders quashed; officer to be retained at present posting till policy tenure completion.

Table of Content
1. applicant's service history and family medical hardships (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9)
2. violation of tenure policy and caregiver exemptions (Para 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25)
3. transfers in administrative exigency with no vested rights (Para 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20)
4. judicial review limited to arbitrary transfers (Para 26 , 27 , 28)
5. non-speaking order and policy non-compliance evident (Para 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33)
6. impugned orders quashed for arbitrariness (Para 34 , 35 , 36)

ORDER

Per: RAMESH SINGH THAKUR, MEMBER (3):

1. The present Original Application filed under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 is directed challenging Transfer Order dated 14.10.2025 qua the applicant read with relieving order dated 21.10.2025 (Annexure A-1 Colly) vide which the applicant has been transferred and posted as Deputy Director (GASAB) in the office of Comptroller & Auditor General of India, New Delhi against a newly created post, and further against order dated 31.10.2025 (Annexure A-2), vide which the respondents have rejected the representation dated 15.10.2025 (Annexure A-12) preferred by the applicant seeking fair and 2 (0.A.No.060/ 1205/2025) equitable consideration of issues relating to his total length of service being less than 2 years after last posting, the applicant being care-giver for his two years and three months old son under regular treatment from departments of Ophthalmology, Orthopedics and Neurology at PGIMER, Chandigarh, his transfer being against the statutory acts, settled law and statutory guidelines, under various O.Ms issued by DoPT etc. and being discriminated upon. The applicant has prayed for quashing of impugned orders Annexure A-1 (Colly) and A-2.

2. Facts of the case in brief are as follows. The applicant is an officer of the Indian Audit & Accounts Service (IA&AS), 2021 Batch. He joined training at the National Academy of Audit & Accounts, Shimla on 21.03.2022 and upon completion of training was posted as Assistant Accountant General in the Office of the Principal Accountant General (A&E), Haryana at Chandigarh vide order dated 01.12.2023 (Annexure A-3). The applicant thereafter held the charge of Deputy Accountant General (Accounts/VLC) from 18.12.2023 to 21.07.2025. Subsequently, the applicant was transferred as Deputy Director in the office of the Principal Director of Audit, Central Expenditure (Agriculture, Food & Water Resources), New Delhi at Chandigarh vide order dated 08.07.2025 (Annexure A-8) against an existing vacancy. He joined the said assignment at Chandigarh and was also directed to assist the Principal Accountant General (A&E), Haryana in implementation of VLC Technical Upgrade vide order dated 14.07.2025. Further, the applicant was assigned additional charge of Senior Deputy Accountant General (AMG-III) in the Office of the Principal Accountant General (Audit), Haryana with effect from 01.09.2025.

3. The applicant states that his family circumstances require his presence at Chandigarh. His spouse is employed with KPMG Global Services with base location at Gurugram, but is presently working from home from Chandigarh due to the medical condition of their minor son. A copy of communication evidencing such work-from-home arrangement is placed on record as Annexure A-4. It is further stated that the applicant’s 3 (0.A.No.060/ 1205/2025) father passed away on 02.08.2025 after prolonged illness and his aged mother is presently residing with him and has recently undergone ankle surgery.

4. It is further averred that the applicant’s minor son, aged approximately two and aé half years, is suffering from West Syndrome/Infantile Spasms with Cortical Visual Impairment and developmental delays. The child was born pre-term and required neonatal intensive care. Thereafter, he developed infantile spasms around the age of eight to nine months resulting in neurological and developmental complications. The child is stated to be under continuou

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