Central Administrative Tribunal - Kolkata
Prahlad Kumar Prasad vs Eastern Railway on 4 November, 2019
1 O.A. 1319.2019 CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA BENCH, KOLKATA fi:
No. O.A. 1319 of 2019 Date of order: 4.11.2019 t-
Present HonTole Ms. Bidisha Banerjee, Judicial Member HonTJe Dr. Nandita Chatterjee, Administrative Member :• Prahlad Kumar Prasad, Son of Muneshwar Prasad, Of 94/A, LBS Road, Belur Bazar, Howrah - 711 20^! '
-* 5? ik ^plidtot ■! ! : < 4:^S4nior Divisional Pe^sotinel Officer,
5. Senior Divisional Commercial Manager, Sealdah Division, Eastern Railway, 700 014.
.... Respondents For the Applicant Mr. A. Dutta, Counsel Mr. S. Roy, Counsel i-
For the Respondents Mr. N.D. Bandyopadhyay, Counsel
•V.
I
'2 O.A. 1319.2019
OR P B R(Oral)
Per Dr. Nandita Chatteriee; Administrative Member:
Aggrieved with the transfer order dated 19.6.2019 vide which the applicant has been transferred on administrative grounds,. and, on the, i recommendation- of the Vigilance from SPR to KNJ (Static), the.applicant has approached the Tribunal praying for the following specific relief:-
"8.1. To set aside and/or q^asji impugned order of transfer dated 19.6.2019 issued vide Office^f&lrife. 142/sU^'^feaRespondent No. 4. 8.2. To pass #directl|nif%i&ei;l)r|r®om^R^ponS%|t Authorities not give ■1*,ea 8.3. .^fShow in terms .ofcnravei/jrS^and 8.2 and;S^&r h^li cause ms^^TRules ahgj|gfeT| #• 8/4. ^Adiribction asj^iiostSjof t* J8.5. lonble , M£ JSSMBEaSc up it a 5 ..........................
is feken <i J:-
'.i ■
m fesion-
3
;i
I; * dr
■l-
3. ubmissioi®k:Q#thf'' ■M a- Ld. CouiSgel, is that^th^^i^giii&^|i .1987 as alTicket •a Bfi Checkt| anc^fthe^pSts^^? ansferred to" Son ber > < 1004. In 2010, h^%as t^mj^Csril "
Ei 19 af Sealdah.
■to
The ap3ikan?V^IPM.iSft "*k r f eave > receiving his ".i] 5 purported punitive t'mnsjfer order dated" i9.6.2,0iL©l:;had-represented^ on :
29.8.2019 to the appropriate authorities but the authorities are yet to ;, respond.
Ld. Counsel for the applicant would pray that the respondent authorities may be directed to issue a reasoned order in response to the representation of the applicant within a specified time frame.
i J f • 3 O.A. 1319.2019 »* Ld. Counsel for the respondents does not object to disposal of the said representation in accordance with law.
5. Accordingly, with the consent of the parties, and, without entering ;
into the merits of the matter, we hereby direct the respondent No. 5, who . o is the Sr. Divisional Commercial Manager, Sealdah Division, Eastern y Railway, to whom the representation has been addressed, to examine the f-
contents of such representation in accordance with law and to issue a speaking and reasoned-hrder on the^same within a period of 8 weeks &I ^iJAe^sion arrived at from the date ..of recei' r A * llr* should be^bi^jifhted |iil luch time th^^e^isin&-^fe"|^^gosed Sf^aie'^jplicant if r^^ Ai ieved earlfr- ^le relie^frof his I 'C8, 'll - «?• I pre|ent .SB-ce of poffirff^S^Sgif^^Wntshollille taken aglinJ| the ». jf. •Wi. • . t. 'rSEiSS'^ n % Is# applicant #11 the disposal oiffi » " # hi ;
6. ^iththes|^| fe^^^sts. & 1 i# 1 'x:% X p: y-
%j?
jT-
/~ - \\£
:
'*St
/
&?■ {
.{•
■ ::'''
!
(Dr. Nandita Chaitbrjee) ' 0fdisha B/knerjee)
Administrative Member^m*- Judicial Member
SP
z