Central Administrative Tribunal - Allahabad
Cod Chheoki Shramik Union And Ors vs Ordnance Depot Fort on 2 June, 2022
Open Court
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
ALLAHABAD BENCH
ALLAHABAD.
(This the 02nd day of June, 2022)
Original Application No. 330/00129/2022.
Hon'ble Mr. Tarun Shridhar, Member (A)
Hon'ble Ms. Pratima K Gupta, Member (J)
1. COD Chheoki Shramik Union, 246 Malak Raj, Rmbagh,
Allahabad now Prayagraj through its Joint Secretary, Shri
Sudhir Kant Yadav.
2. P.N. Pandey aged about 50 years, working as T/Mate,
COD, Chheoki, Naini, Prayagraj.
3. Surendra Patel, aged about 46 years, working as T/Mate,
COD, Chheoki, Naini, Prayagraj.
4. Md. Sarwar, aged about 50 years, working as T/Mate, COD,
Chheoki, Naini, Prayagraj.
5. Ram Lakhan Yadav, aged about 56 years, working as
T/Mate, COD, Chheoki, Naini, Prayagraj.
6 Avadh Raj, aged about 46 years, working as T/Mate, COD,
Chheoki, Naini, Prayagraj.
7. Ramlakhan Sahu, aged about 56 years, working as T/Mate,
COD, Chheoki, Naini, Prayagraj.
8 Chandra Pal Singh, aged about 57 years, working as
T/Mate, COD, Chheoki, Naini, Prayagraj.
9. Rameshwar Dwivedi, aged about 43 years, working as
T/Mate, COD, Chheoki, Naini, Prayagraj.
10. Vinod Yadav, aged about 53 years, working as T/Mate,
COD, Chheoki, Naini, Prayagraj.
11. Sunil Yadav, aged about 44 years, working as T/Mate,
COD, Chheoki, Naini, Prayagraj.
12 Chandra Pal aged about 56 years, working as T/Mate,
COD, Chheoki, Naini, Prayagraj.
13 Jabar Singh, aged about 45 years, working as T/Mate,
COD, Chheoki, Naini, Prayagraj.
14. Sant Lal Pal, aged about 48 years, working as T/Mate,
COD, Chheoki, Naini, Prayagraj.
15. Pancham Lal, aged about 53 years, working as T/Mate,
COD, Chheoki, Naini, Prayagraj.
16 Ram Paras, aged about 56 years, working as T/Mate, COD,
Chheoki, Naini, Prayagraj.
17 Subhash Chandra, aged about 43 years, working as
T/Mate, COD, Chheoki, Naini, Prayagraj.
18 Sudhir Kant Yadav, aged about 36 years, working as
Page 1 of 8
UPHOLSTR, COD, Chheoki, Naini, Prayagraj.
19 Rahul Yadav, aged about 37 years, working as TCS, COD,
Chheoki, Naini, Prayagraj.
20 Avnish Kumar Singh, aged about 36 years, working as
JMA, COD, Chheoki, Naini, Prayagraj.
21. Shani Kumar, aged about 33 years, working as T/Mate,
COD, Chheoki, Naini, Prayagraj.
22 Arun Kumar Tiwari, aged about 52 years, working as
T/Mate, COD, Chheoki, Naini, Prayagraj.
23 Chandra Singh Bist, aged about 33 years, working as JOA,
COD, Chheoki, Naini, Prayagraj.
24. RP Singh aged about 47 years, working as HS-1, COD,
Chheoki, Naini, Prayagraj.
25. Rama Shankar aged about 53 years, working as T/Mate,
COD, Chheoki, Naini, Prayagraj.
26 Rakesh Kumar Yadav, aged about 51 years, working as
T/Mate, COD, Chheoki, Naini, Prayagraj.
27 Kanti Devi, aged about 47 years, working as T/Mate, COD,
Chheoki, Naini, Prayagraj.
28 Sunil Kumar Yadav, aged about 41 years, working as
T/Mate, COD, Chheoki, Naini, Prayagraj.
29 Anand Kumar, aged about 41 years, working as T/Mate,
COD, Chheoki, Naini, Prayagraj.
30 Smt. Geeta Rani, aged about 55 years, working as T/Mate,
COD, Chheoki, Naini, Prayagraj.
31 Smt.Shakuntala, aged about 48 years, working as T/Mate,
COD, Chheoki, Naini, Prayagraj.
32 Jalila Begum, aged about 51 years, working as T/Mate,
COD, Chheoki, Naini, Prayagraj.
33 Ram Nath, aged about 50 years, working as T/Mate, COD,
Chheoki, Naini, Prayagraj.
34 Vijay Prakash Tripathi aged about 46 years, working as
T/Mate, COD, Chheoki, Naini, Prayagraj.
35 Indra Prakash, aged about 53 years, working as T/Mate,
COD, Chheoki, Naini, Prayagraj.
36 Mithilesh Kumar, aged about 54 years, working as T/Mate,
COD, Chheoki, Naini, Prayagraj.
37 Jai Chandra, aged about 53 years, working as T/Mate,
COD, Chheoki, Naini, Prayagraj.
38 Dwarika Prasad, aged about 56 years, working as T/Mate,
COD, Chheoki, Naini, Prayagraj.
39 Sunil Kumar Pandey, aged about 48 years, working as
T/Mate, COD, Chheoki, Naini, Prayagraj.
40 Shyam Babu Yadav, aged about 58 years, working as
T/Mate, COD, Chheoki, Naini, Prayagraj.
41 Rajendra Prasad Singh, aged about 59 years, working as
T/Mate, COD, Chheoki, Naini, Prayagraj.
42 Veer Bahadur Thapa, aged about 53 years, working as
T/Mate, COD, Chheoki, Naini, Prayagraj.
43 Smt. Photo Devi, aged about 53 years, working as T/Mate,
Page 2 of 8
COD, Chheoki, Naini, Prayagraj.
...Applicants
By Advocate :Shri M.K. Yadav/Shri L.M. Singh
VERSUS
1 Union of India through the Secretary, Ministry of Defence,
Department of Production, South Block New Delhi.
2. Director General of Ordnance Services OS-22, Ministry of
Defence, Department of Production, South Block, New Delhi.
3. Officer-in-Charge Record, AOC, (Army Ordnance Corps)
Records, Secundrabad PIN 900453, C/o 56 APO
4. The Commandant, Central Ordnance Depot (COD),
Chheoki, Naini, Prayagraj PIN 900479, C/o 56 APO.
5. The Commandant, Central Ordnance Depot, (COD), Kanpur
C/o 56 APO
6. The Commandant, Ordnance Depot, (OD) Fort, Prayagraj
Pin 908778 C/o 56 APO
7. SMO, Ordnance Depot (OD) Fort, Prayagraj PIN 908775,
C/o 56 APO
8. Sri Satyam working as T/Mate, COD Chheoki Naini,
Prayagraj, PIN 900479.
9 Sri Pankaj Kumar working as OS, COD, Chheoki Naini,
Prayagraj, pin 900479.
10 Ritesh Kumar Singh, working as SMA, COD, Chheoki Naini,
Prayagraj Pin 900479
. . .Respondents
By Advocate: Shri M.K. Sharma/Mr. Bablu Singh
ORDER
We have joined the Division Bench online through video conferring.
2. Shri L.M. Singh along with Shri Manish Kumar Yadav, learned counsel for the applicants and Shri M.K. Sharma along Page 3 of 8 with Mr. Bablu Singh, learned counsel for the respondents are present.
3. By virtue of the present original application, the applicants seek the following reliefs:-
"1. Issue an order or direction in the nature of certiorari calling for records of order impugned posting/redeployment order dated 25.09.2021 and order dated 22.10.2021 (Annexure A-1 & A-2 to the OA) passed by the Respondent No.3 and 7 respectively and quash the same so far as it relates to the applicants.
2. Issue an order or directions, in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to consider the posting /redeployment of the applicants at OD Fort, Allahabad due considering the provisions of disbandment policy in as much as vacancy position existing vacancy position.
3. Issue any other and further orders or directions, which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.
4. Award the cost of the OA in favour of the Applicant".
4. At the outset, learned counsel for the respondents submits that identical reliefs were sought in OA No. 808 of 2021, which has since been decided on 25.04.2022. While deciding the aforesaid original application, the following order was passed:-
"13. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and gone through the documents on record, particularly the ones referred to by the learned counsel for the parties. It is not disputed that there has been a restructuring of the Ordnance Depots leading to disbanding of certain units and merger of certain other units. It is also not disputed that Page 4 of 8 such a reorganization/restructuring has necessitated redeployment and transfer of the employees posted in such units to other units. The limited controversy at hand is whether such redeployment and transfer with respect to the applicant has been done in accordance with the guidelines on the subject. Accordingly, we are of the view that it is appropriate to dispose of this Original Application with a direction to the competent authority amongst the respondents that the order of redeployment/transfer be reconsidered/reviewed against the background of their guidelines contained in Army Order 12/2020/MP-4, in particular para 13 and the provisions of roadmap issued on 06th October, 2020. We leave it to the good sense and the judgment of the competent authority to take an appropriate and objective decision in the matter. We offer a liberty of one week to the applicant to file a comprehensive representation before the appropriate authority in case he so wishes.
13. The competent authority amongst the respondents is further directed to take a well-considered and objective decision in the matter within a period of 8 weeks from the date of this order.
14. The Interim protection awarded to the applicant shall remain operative till the competent authority takes an appropriate decision in pursuance to the directions issued in Para 13 above.
15. With the aforesaid directions, the O.A. stands disposed off".
5. A bare reading of the present original application indicates that there is absolutely no difference in the relief sought in this OA. The issue, facts and circumstances and the decision being Page 5 of 8 challenged in the present OA are totally identical to the issue, facts and the circumstances enunciated in OA No. 808 of 2021, which has already been decided.
6. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the issues and facts may be identical, however, while deciding the OA, this Tribunal should go into the grounds for the relief sought also. The grounds sought in the OA No. 808 of 2021 included the ground of violation of the policy which dictates that the a married employee should be posted in the same station as the response whereas the grounds adduced in the present OA does not have this particular fact.
7. After going through the record, we are of the considered view that what is being challenged is a wider administrative and policy decision which has led to the reorganization and restructuring of various units of the Ordnance Factories. By virtue of the interim protection given to the applicants against the redeployment, the entire policy of restructuring and reorganization has been to some extent been stalled. This is not a very healthy position and the Tribunal should be very cautious that its order do not amount to interference in governance. Since we have already adjudicated the issue of redeployment of several employees pursuant to the restructuring and reorganization in OA No. 808/2021, we do not find any substantive ground to deviate from the decision already taken.
Page 6 of 8
8. Accordingly, on the analogy of OA No. 808 of 2021, we dispose of this original application with a direction to the competent authority amongst the respondents that the order of redeployment/transfer qua the applicants be reconsidered/reviewed against the background of their guidelines contained in Army Order 12/2020/MP-4, in particular para 13 and the provisions of roadmap issued on 06th October, 2020. We leave it to the good sense and the judgment of the competent authority to take an appropriate and objective decision in the matter. We offer a liberty of one week to the applicants to file a comprehensive representation before the appropriate authority in case they so wish. The competent authority should also consider the contents of the present original application along with the counter filed by the respondents and the averments made therein as a part of the representation of the applicants.
9. The competent authority amongst the respondents is further directed to take a well-considered and objective decision in the matter, in accordance with rules, within a period of 8 weeks from the date of this order.
10. The Interim protection awarded to the applicants shall remain operative till the competent authority takes an appropriate decision in pursuance to the directions issued in the aforesaid paragraphs.
Page 7 of 8
12. The O.A. stands disposed of in the light of the directions given above. No order as to costs.
(Pratima K. Gupta) (Tarun Shridhar)
Member (J) Member (A)
Manish/-
Page 8 of 8