Central Administrative Tribunal - Jabalpur
Rajesh Kumar Pathak vs Union Of India on 30 March, 2011
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, JABALPUR BENCH
JABALPUR
ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO. 279 OF 2011
Jabalpur, this the 30th day of March, 2011
HONBLE MR. HRIDAY NARAIN, ADMINISTRATIVE MEMBER
Rajesh Kumar Pathak, S/o Shri K.N.Pathak
Aged about 48 years SDE (FM), Indore
R/o 3/4 Meghdoot Park Exchange,
Indore (M.P.) 452001 - Applicant
(By Advocate Shri M.K.Verma)
V e r s u s
1. Union of India, through Secretary,
Department of Telecom Sanchar Bhawan,
New Delhi-110 001.
2. Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited
Through Chief Managing Director
Bharat Sanchar Bhawan
Corporate Office New Delhi-110 001
3. Chief General Manager
Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd.
BSNL Bhawan Hoshangabad Road
New Govt. Press Bhopal (MP)-462015
4. Shri R.K.P. Hinduja Chief General Manager
Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd.
BSNL Bhawan Hoshangabad Road
New Govt. Press Bhopal (MP)-462015 - Respondents
(By Advocate Shri R.S.Siddiqui, learned Senior Standing counsel for GOI & Shri S.P.Singh, learned counsel for BSNL)
O R D E R (Oral)
Heard Mr.M.K.Verma, learned counsel representing the Applicant, Mr.S.P.Singh, learned counsel for BSNL (to whom a copy of this OA has already been supplied) and Mr.R.S.Siddiqui, and learned Senior Standing Counsel for Govt. of India representing the Respondent No.1.
2. The present OA has been filed against the transfer order dated 23.03.2011 by which the Applicant has been transferred from the Office of GMTD Indore to the Office of TDM Mandsaur. It is submitted that the said transfer order is against the policy of the organization and has been passed in a mala fide manner. It is particularly alleged that the transferring authority, who is Respondent No.4, is going to retire on 30.04.2011 and he has made a mass transfer of employees with mala fide intention. It is submitted that he has drawn up the transfer list only of four stations viz. Indore, Gwalior, Bhopal and Jabalpur, which according to the learned counsel for the Applicant also shows the mala fides. It is also alleged by Shri M.K.Verma, learned counsel for the Applicant that certain transfers were effected in the month of March,2010, but these transfers had not been carried out and without relieving those 11 employees mentioned in para 5.14 of the OA, the present Applicant has been transferred. Shri Verma, learned counsel for the Applicant also submitted that in Para 5.12 of the present OA it has been brought out that certain persons were senior to the Applicant as per station seniority, but they are still working and they have not been transferred out. He has also mentioned the names of a few employees in this regard in para 5.12 of the OA.
3. As against these submissions Shri S.P.Singh learned counsel for the Respondent-BSNL drew my attention to the transfer policy Annexure A-2 and submitted that the administration was given discretion to transfer any employee in the interest of business requirement. He submitted that even the station tenure could be as less as three years and 10 years period was not compulsory. He also submitted that the Applicant had not submitted any document in support of the submission made in para 5.14 of the OA. Shri S.P.Singh submits that transfer is not something mechanical and the administration has got every right to transfer any person from one place to another. No employee can claim any relief on the ground that any other employee has not been transferred.
4. After hearing both sides and after perusal of the materials available on record I am of the view that ends of justice shall be served in this case if a direction is given to Respondent No.2 to consider this OA as the representation of the Applicant and to apply his mind to the submissions made in the OA and then to decide the matter. After deciding the matter the Respondent No.2 shall communicate his decision to the Applicant. Though no opinion is being expressed on the merits of the matter, yet it is impressed upon the Respondent No.2 to closely consider all the points made by the Applicant in the present OA because when mala fides against any administrative action is alleged, it is in the interest of the administration to go deep into the matter and to take a decision in such a manner as to generate confidence amongst general employees. The Respondent No.2 shall be free to consider the matter on merits as per the rules. He shall also take into account the transfer guidelines and may also take into account any other facts relevant for deciding the issue in the interest of the organization. Incidentally, it is stated that a similar matter had arisen in OA No.262/2011, which was disposed of by this Tribunal vide order dated 25.03.2011 and the present order is being passed on the same lines. The Respondent No.2 shall decide the matter as early as possible, but in any case within 30 days of the receipt of this order.
5. The OA is thus disposed of at the time of admission itself, with no order as to costs.
6. Send copies of this order to the Applicant and to all the Respondents (along with copies of this Original Application) in the addresses given in the OA and free copies of this order be supplied to the learned counsel for the parties.
(Hriday Narain) Administrative Member rkv