Central Administrative Tribunal - Delhi
Sanjeevan Prakash vs Indian Council Of Agriculture Research on 26 March, 2024
1
OA No. 1266/2024
Item No. 7 (C-2)
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI
O.A. No. 1266/2024
This the 26th Day of March, 2024
Hon'ble Mr. Tarun Shridhar, Member (A)
Smt. Sanjeevan Prakash,
Aged about 54 years
W/o Shri Rajan Khurana
Rio B-24,
Indian Agricultural Research Institute
Pusa, New Delhi - 110012
....Applicant
(By Advocate : Mr. B.T. Kaul with Mr. Abhishek Kaushal)
VERSUS
1. Indian Council of Agricultural Research
Through, the Secretary
Krishi Bhawan,
Dr. Rajendra Prasad Road
New Delhi - 110001
2. The Director General
Indian Council of Agricultural Research
Krishi Bhawan,
Dr. Rajendra Prasad Road
New Delhi - 110001
3. Indian Agricultural Research Institute
Through, the Director
Pusa, New Delhi- 110012
.... RESPONDENTS
[By Advocate : Mr. Praveen Swaroop for R-1 to 3, Mr. R.S. Rana]
2
OA No. 1266/2024
Item No. 7 (C-2)
ORDER (ORAL)
Hon'ble Mr. Tarun Shridhar, Member (A) The applicant holds the post of Comptroller (Finance and Accounts) in the ICAR and is aggrieved by an order dated 24.01.2024 vide which she has been transferred from her present position in Delhi to ICAR- IVRI, Izatnagar. She had preferred a representation to the Director General, ICAR on 31.01.2024 (Annexure A-11) but the said representation has been rejected and the rejection has been conveyed vide OM dated 14.03.2024. The OA was heard on 22.03.2024 and the following order was passed :
None for the respondents.
Learned senior counsel for the applicant states that the applicant has been subjected to discriminatory treatment at the hands of the respondents in view of the fact that she has been transferred on 24.01.2024 from Delhi to Izatnagar despite there being no post of Comptroller at Izatnagar. Moreover, the applicant is due for promotion to the post of Sr. Comptroller for which she had become eligible in the year 2023, however, the promotion is yet to be granted and she has been transferred on the verge of her promotion. Learned counsel further states that as can be seen from the order dated 14.03.2024 placed at page 29 of the OA, the applicant has been directed to join the new place of posting at Izatnagar within 10 days from the date of issue of the said order.3
OA No. 1266/2024 Item No. 7 (C-2) Learned counsel places on record an order issued by the respondents on 19.03.2024 whereby the applicant is to be relieved on 22.03.2024, i.e. today, in the afternoon. Since, the matter is being heard in the forenoon, it is clear that she is yet to be relieved.
Since there is no representation from the side of the respondents and as the vacation is starting from tomorrow, we deem it fit to direct that this matter be placed before the Vacation Bench to be held on 26.03.2024. Meanwhile, the respondents are directed not to take any coercive action against the applicant.
Issue notice to the respondents returnable within four weeks. Rejoinder, if any, be filed within two weeks thereafter. Let the matter be listed for consideration of interim relief on 26.04.2024.
Order Dasti.
2. Learned counsel for ICAR appears on the advance service and informs on instructions that none had appeared on 22.03.2024 and by the time the order was conveyed, the applicant stood relieved. Hence, at this stage, the applicant's prayer for interim relief is beyond consideration as it has become redundant.
3. The specific relief para available vide para 8 of the OA reads as under :
(a) Direct the Respondents to take active steps in time bound eligible in all respects with outstanding service record and promote her to the said post without further delay; 4 OA No. 1266/2024
Item No. 7 (C-2)
(b) Quash the office order of the Respondent nos. 1 and 2 dated 24.01.2024 transferring the Applicant to IVRI, Izatnagar as Comptroller which, inter alia, is contrary to the DoPT OM dated 02.11.2022;
(c) Quash the order dated 14.03.2024 which has rejected the representations of the Applicant without giving reasons and in a mechanical manner without application of mind;
(d)Grant promotion to the Applicant to the post of Senior Comptroller/Joint Secretary with effect from O1.01.2023;
(e) Award costs in favour of the applicant and against the respondent; and
(f) Pass such other or further order(s) as this Hon'ble Tribunal may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the present case.
4. When it has been pointed out to the learned counsel for the applicant as to the admissibility of the multiple reliefs not necessarily related to each other, he fairly submits that the applicant would not be pressing for relief outlined in para 8(a) and would confine the prayer only to her grievance qua her transfer. However, he seeks liberty on behalf of the applicant to agitate the said grievance with respect to promotion by taking recourse to an appropriate remedy in accordance with the law.
5. Learned counsel for the applicant has briefly argued, while narrating the background of the case, that the applicant's promotion is since long due to the post of 5 OA No. 1266/2024 Item No. 7 (C-2) Joint Secretary (Finance) and in terms of the rotational transfer policy of the respondents, the officers who are eligible for promotion within a period of one year are not to be transferred. Further, drawing attention to the documents placed on record, he submits that the post of Comptroller does not exist at IVRI Izatnagar and actually, it is the post of Joint Secretary (Finance) and if the respondents were to transfer the applicant therein, they should have first promoted her. In fact, the post of Joint Secretary (Finance) is going to fall vacant at Headquarters and the respondents have brought an officer from Izatnagar, Bareilly to fill in the shoes of the officer who was holding the said post instead of extending the benefit to the applicant to which she is entitled.
6. Learned counsel for the respondents has vehemently opposed the prayer made in the OA and submitted that since the applicant has already been relieved, the OA has been rendered infructuous. Further, he has argued that the post of the applicant carries an all India transfer liability. He further even when the applicant was transferred to Jharkhand, she had been adjusted at Delhi, thus she has, all through her career remained in Delhi.
6OA No. 1266/2024 Item No. 7 (C-2)
7. Learned counsel for the applicant had clarified that the transfer of the applicant to Jharkhand was during the Covid-19 pandemic period and hence it is the external circumstances which prevented her from going and physically joining there.
8. After hearing the learned counsels for the parties for some time and going through the documents on record, I would consciously refrain from commenting upon the merits of the claim of the applicant as outlined in the present OA for the reasons which will become apparent.
9. The representation, the applicant had preferred on 31.01.2024, seeks cancellation of her transfer on the following grounds :
(a) Some exceptional circumstances have emerged during the period of her transfer which require her presence in Delhi to attend to her domestic duties. She explains that her husband is suffering from multiple health issues and requires regular treatment in RML Hospital. In case, she leave Delhi and join at Izatnagar, Bareilly at this stage, she would not be able to look after her ailing husband. She had elaborated 7 OA No. 1266/2024 Item No. 7 (C-2) that he is also facing certain psychological issues which pose serious challenge to her in terms of managing her family affairs.
(b) The applicant has prayed that since she is due for promotion w.e.f. 01.01.2024, her request may be considered in terms of her eligibility and accordingly, she should be exempted from rotational transfer in accordance with the policy which specifically provides for such an exemption.
(c) She has been holding multiple charges, including several externally aided projects and hence the organization would benefit if she is allowed to continue in her present capacity.
10. Learned counsel for the applicant has pointed out that none of these issues has been discussed or considered in the order dated 14.03.2024 vide which the representation of the applicant has been rejected. The said order being cryptic would not stand the test of law, he further adds.
11. I find that the representation the applicant has preferred on 31.01.2024, does not put any challenge to the transfer order but merely makes a request for re- 8 OA No. 1266/2024 Item No. 7 (C-2) consideration on grounds which have been enumerated above. In fact, she regrets if she has been a cause of any inconvenience to the organization and restates her dedication and commitment to the organization. In fact, she is emphasizing that she may be allowed to discharge her family duties alongside her official commitments. She concludes that the said representation reiterating her commitment and prays for compassion on account of her unique family situation.
12. Although, I have given due consideration to the contentions of the learned counsel for the respondents, against the background of what has been elaborately outlined above and considering that the order dated 14.03.2024 is a terse and cryptic order, I dispose of the present OA with a direction to Respondent No. 2 to give a re-consideration to the prayer made by the applicant in her representation dated 31.01.2024 and take a decision afresh in the matter.
13. I would like to emphatically state that in view of the fact that a judicial order is being passed, such a consideration followed by decision, shall be de novo without allowing the earlier order to colour the opinion of the competent authority in the matter. The decision so 9 OA No. 1266/2024 Item No. 7 (C-2) taken shall be communicated to the applicant by way of a reasoned communication. Till such time a decision is taken and communicated to the applicant, the order of transfer dated 24.01.2024 and subsequent relieving order dated 19.03.2024, shall not be given effect to.
14. Before parting, I would like to emphatically state that besides the limited observations made above, nothing in this order is to be construed as my comment upon the merits of the claim of the applicant as expressed in the OA.
15. The OA stands disposed of against the background of the aforesaid directions with liberty to the applicant to take recourse to an appropriate remedy in accordance with the law.
There shall be no orders as to costs.
(Tarun Shridhar) Member(A) /NISHA/