Central Administrative Tribunal - Madras
S Arivarasu vs M/O Information And Broadcasting on 8 April, 2019
i OA 508/2019 CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL CHENNAI BENCH OA/310/00508/2019 Dated Monday the 8" day of April Two Thousand Nineteen CORAM: HON'BLE MR. R. RAMANUJAM, Member (A) HON'BLE MR. P. MADHAVAN, Member (J) S.Arivarasu, 20/7, CPWD Quarters Old, Besant Nagar, Chennai 600090. ...-Applicant By Advocate M/s. Balan Haridas Vs 1.Union of India, rep by Deputy Director General (Administration), Doordarshan, Doordarshan Bhawan, Mandi House, Coopernicus Marg, New Delhi 110001. 2.The Director, Doordarshan Kendra, Swami Vivekananda Salai, Chennai 600005. .... Respondents By Advocate Mr. Su. Srinivasan = 2 OA 508/2019 ORAL ORDER
(Pronounced by Hon'ble Mr. R. Ramanujam, Member(A)) Heard. The applicant has filed this OA seeking the following reliefs :
"i To quash the order of the 1* respondent dated 15.11.2018 in so far concerned to the applicant bearing office order No. 31/2018-S.I and the order of the 1* respondent dated 21.01.2019 bearing office order no. 1/2019-8.1 in so far as not retaining the applicant in Chennai till September, 2019.
ii, consequently direct the respondents to retain the applicant in Chennai in the office of the 2™ respondent till September, 2019 and iii. | pass such other orders or directions as this Hon'ble Tribunal think fit in the circumstances of the case and render justice."
2. The applicant was aggrieved by office order dt. 15.11.2018 transferring him from Chennai to Thiruvananthapuram w.e.f. 25.02.2019. He filed Annexure A10 representation seeking retention at Chennai till August 2019 on the ground that his daughter was studying in the 12" standard and she was going to appear for. CBSE Board examinations in 2019. However, by an order dt. 21.01.2019, the applicant was allowed retention at Chennai only upto 31.03.2019.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant would draw attention to Annexure A15 transfer policy of the respondents issued in 2014. In terms of para 10.9 thereof, the employees whose children were finishing class 12 and appearing for competitive examinations, 31* August may be taken as the date for completion of transfer order, provided a request to this effect had been made prior to the issue of transfer orders. It is accordingly submitted that in as much as the) applicant's daughter was studying in class 12 in the academic year 2018-19, the applicant was entitled to retention at Chennai till 31.08.2019.
¥ 3 OA 5308/2019
4. Mr, Su. Srinivasan, SCGSC takes notice for the respondents and submits that the provision in the transfer policy referred to by the learned counsel for applicant is only in respect of persons who had made a representation before the issue of transfer order. The applicant had completed his tenure at Chennai and accordinlgy he was posted to Thiruvananthapuram w.e.f. 25.02.2019 by an order dt. 15.11.2018. In as much as the applicant failed to make a representation in this regard before the issue of the transfer order, he was not entitled to the benefit of retention upto 31° August, it is contended.
5, Learned SCGSC would further submit that the appilcant had since been relieved from Chennai and by an order dt. 29.03.2019 and directed to report at Doordarshan Kendra, Thiruvananthapuram. The person posted in his place at Chennai had already joined and, therefore, the process cannot be reversed, it is pointed out.
6. | We have considered the matter at the admission stage. It appears that the applicant's tenure at Chennai was to end on 24.02.2019 and accordingly he has . been transferred to Thiruvananthapuram w.e.f. 25.02.2019. The applicant made Annexure A10 representation dt. 09.12.2018 seeking to be retained at Chennai till August 2019 stating that the applicant's daughter was studying in the 12"
class in Kendriya Vidyalaya, CLRI, Chennai and her admission procedure would be completed by August 2019. Accordingly, his presence with her was very much essential till she was admitted to a college. It is not clear why the applicant was allowed to be retained only upto 31.03.2019 when the transfer L q 4 OA 5308/2019 policy clearly provides for retention upto 31* August in cases where the children are studying in class 12.
7. It is seen that the decision to extend the applicant's retention only upto 31.03.2019 had been conveyed by an non-speaking office order dt. 21.01.2019. Since the applicant's tenure in Chennai was till 24.02.2019 and the applicant had made the request for retention on 09.12.2018 though after the transfer order was issued, the same was made well before the expiry of the applicant's tenure at Chennai. Accordingly, we are of the view that the applicant's 2" representation dt. 11.02.2019 must be considered in terms of the transfer policy, 2014 of the respondents. We, therefore, direct that the applicant's representations dig 09.12.2018 & 11.02.2019 be considered by the competent authority in accordance with the transfer policy of the respondents issued in the year 2014 and a reasoned and speaking order passed within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. |
8. At the request of counsel for the applicant, status quo as on date shall be maintained in respect of the applicant till such order is passed.
9, OAis disposed of at the admission stage. |
76)