Central Administrative Tribunal - Allahabad
Shailendra Kumar Singh vs Defence on 25 November, 2025
1
(Open Court)
Central Administrative Tribunal
Allahabad Bench, Allahabad
****
Original Application No.1046 of 2025
This the 25th Day of November, 2025.
Hon'ble Mr. Rajnish Kumar Rai, Member (J)
Shailendra Kumar Singh, AE (QA), SQAE (GS) DGQA
Complex Ashok Path Kanpur, aged about 53 years, Son of
Ram Krishna Ahirwar, Resident of near nav Chetan Park, M.E.
48 Mini M.I.G Hemant Vihar Barra 2, S.O. Kanpur Nagar, U.P.
208027.
....Applicant.
By Advocate: Mr. B.K. Singh Raghuvanshi/Mr. Akshay Raghuvanshi.
Versus
1. Union of India through Secretary, Ministry of Defence
Production 136 South Block, New Delhi.
2. The Director General of Quality Assurance Government
of India Ministry of Defence Production-DGQA (Stores)
Nirman Bhawan P.O. New Delhi.
3. The ADDL, DGQA (S) Department of Defence Production
DGQA G-Block New Delhi.
4. Senior Quality Assurance Officer, Senior Quality
Assurance Establishment DGQA Complex, Ashok Path,
Kanpur Cantt-208004.
5. The Controller, Controllerate of Quality Assurance,
CQA(GS), DGQA Stores Complex, Ashok Path, Cantt,
Kanpur 208004.
...Respondents
By Advocate: Mr. Rajni Kant Rai.
SHAKUNTALA VERMA
2
ORDER
Mr. B.K. Singh Raghuvanshi, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. Rajni Kant Rai, learned counsel for the respondents are present and heard.
2. The instant original application has been filed seeking following reliefs: -
"(i) To quash the impugned posting/transfer order dated 08.10.2025 passed by the respondent no.2 and impugned movement order dated 08.10.2025 passed by concerning authority (Annexure No. 1 and 2).
(ii) Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to direct the respondents not to interfere in the peaceful working of the applicant at their respective place of posting.
(iii) Issue any other and further writ, order or directions, which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.
(iv) Award the cost of the O.A. to the Applicant."
3. The brief facts of the case are that the applicant, Shailendra Kumar Singh, presently working as Assistant Engineer (QA) in SQAE (GS), Kanpur, has approached this Tribunal assailing the impugned posting/transfer order dated 08.10.2025 vide which applicant has been transferred from SQAE (GS), Kanpur to SQAE (GS), New Delhi and consequential movement order of the same date, passed by respondent no.2, on the ground that the same is arbitrary, non-speaking and contrary to the Rotational Transfer Policy (RTP) of DGQA. Being aggrieved by the said orders, the applicant has filed this Original Application.
SHAKUNTALA VERMA 3
4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant joined his present establishment on 11.06.2019 and has not yet completed five years in the establishment nor seven years at the station. It is urged that transfer from sensitive post to sensitive post is impermissible under the policy dated 07.03.1988. Further, the revised RTP dated 24.11.2016 and subsequent clarifications exempt the scientific cadre, and mandate that three choice stations be considered.
5. It is further contended that the applicant is the sole son, his father having expired in 2019, and his mother aged about 84 years is suffering from chronic ailments including bronchial asthma, hypertension and osteoporosis, requiring constant care. Reliance is placed upon para 14 of the RTP-2025, which specifically provides for sympathetic consideration in cases of caregivers for aged parents (80 years & above). Learned counsel for the applicant further submitted that, looking to the health condition of the applicant's mother and the poor air quality at New Delhi, the applicant deserves protection from transfer for a period of at least three months.
6. Learned counsel has drawn attention to earlier judgments of this Tribunal in O.A. Nos. 956/2017, 577/2018, 329/2020 and others, wherein similar transfer orders were stayed or quashed, holding that arbitrary transfers without adherence to RTP are unsustainable.
7. Per contra, the respondents in their short counter affidavit have stated that the applicant's services are SHAKUNTALA VERMA 4 transferable throughout India, his representation was duly considered, and the impugned order dated 08.10.2025 has been passed in accordance with policy without any malafide.
8. Having considered the submissions and perused the material on record, this Tribunal finds that the impugned order dated 08.10.2025 is a non-speaking order, deciding representations of multiple employees in a casual manner without addressing the specific grounds raised by the applicant. The applicant's case squarely falls within the protective ambit of para 14 of the RTP-2025, which mandates sympathetic consideration for caregivers of aged parents above 80 years.
9. Therefore, in the light of the policy decision contained in para 14 of the RTP-2025, and keeping in view the humanitarian circumstances pleaded, this Tribunal is of the considered view that the grievance of the applicant deserves reconsideration by the competent authority. The competent authority amongst the respondents is directed to reconsider the applicant's representation dated 29.08.2025 along with the medical documents, in the light of para 14 of the RTP-2025, and pass a reasoned and speaking order strictly in accordance with the applicable transfer policy. While doing so, the authority shall also consider the feasibility of permitting the applicant to continue at Kanpur for at least three months, having regard to the health condition of his mother and the poor air quality at New Delhi. The aforesaid exercise shall be completed within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. Till such time the applicant's grievance is duly considered SHAKUNTALA VERMA 5 and a final decision is communicated, he shall not be disturbed from his present place of posting at SQAE (GS), Kanpur, if he has not already been relieved.
10. It is clarified that this Tribunal has not entered into the merits of the transfer order, nor has it examined the issues of delay and laches at this stage.
11. Accordingly, the Original Application is disposed of at the admission stage itself. There shall be no order as to costs.
12. All pending Miscellaneous Applications, if any, also stand disposed of.
(Rajnish Kumar Rai) Member (J) /Shakuntala/ SHAKUNTALA VERMA