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) 10897

CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH CAMP AT NAGPUR
M.G. Sewlikar, Member (J)
Geetika Maheshwari – Appellant
Versus
Central Railway – Respondent
Original Application No. 616/2026



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Rashi Deshpande
For the Respondents: N.P. Lambat

The court directed the competent authority to decide a pending transfer representation within three weeks, emphasizing that administrative authorities cannot leave such applications pending indefinitely.

Headnote:(A) Service Law - Transfer Representation - Time-bound Disposal - When a representation for transfer remains undecided for an extended period (nearly two years), the court may direct the competent authority to pass a speaking order within a specific timeframe. (Para 4)

Issues: Whether the respondents are mandated to decide the applicant's pending transfer representation within a fixed period.

Table of Content
1. the applicant seeks a decision on a pending transfer representation submitted to the railway authorities. (Para 1 , 2)
2. the court mandates the issuance of a speaking order within a strict three-week deadline to prevent indefinite administrative delay. (Para 3 , 4)
3. formal disposal of the original application and associated miscellaneous applications. (Para 5)

ORAL ORDER

Per: Justice M.G. Sewlikar, Member (J)

1. I have heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned counsel for the respondents.

2. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has made representation on 04th September, 2024 to the respondents which the respondents have not yet decided. The applicant has sought transfer to Raipur Division. Learned counsel for the respondents states that the General Manager with whom the application is pending, will decide the said application in a time bound manner.

3. In view of the above, the General Manager is directed to decide the representation within a period of three weeks from today.

4. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that it will not be possible for the General Manager to decide the representation within a period of three weeks and, therefore, eight weeks’ time may be granted. Request is rejected. Already, close to two years have passed since the date of making application. Respondents cannot sit over the application for indefinite period. In this view of the matter, following order is passed:-

i) General Manager/Competent Authority shall pass a speaking order on the application dated 04th September, 2024 within a period of three weeks from today in accordance with rules/ regulations/ extant circulars/ notifications/ office memorandums/ orders, etc.

ii) It is made clear that I have not passed any order touching the merits of the matter.

5. With these directions, OA stands disposed of. Pending MAs, if any, stand disposed of. No costs.

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