Central Administrative Tribunal - Jabalpur
Nand Kishor Kumar vs Cag Of India New Delhi on 14 December, 2023
1 O.A.No. 200/00162/2023
Reserved
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, JABALPUR BENCH
Jabalpur
Original Application No.200/00162/2023
Jabalpur, this Thursday, the 14th day of December, 2023
HON'BLE JUSTICE SHRI AKHIL KUMAR SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER
HON'BLE SHRI KUMAR RAJESH CHANDRA, ADMINISTRATIVE MEMBER
Nand Kishore Kumar, S/o Shri Chaturgun Karanwal, Aged
about 41 years, Occupation: Divisional Accountant Officer
Grade-II, R/o C/o Babloo Pathak, Beyond Narbada Bridge,
Devra Tiraha, Near Konark Marriage Garden, Dindori, District
Dindori (M.P.) - 481880.
- Applicant
(By Advocate- Mrs. Shobha Menon assisted by Shri Rahul
Choubey and Ritu Janjani)
Versus
1. The Comptroller & Auditor General of India, Pocket-9, Deen
Dayal Upadhyay Marg, New Delhi - 110124
2. Principal Accountant General (A&E)-I MP, Lekha Bhawan,
Jhansi Gwalior (M.P.) - 474002
3. Deputy Accountant General, (Works Accounts), O/o
Principal Accountant General (A&E) - I MP, Bhopal Branch,
53 Arera Hills, Hoshangabad Road, Bhopal (M.P.) - 462011
4. Anil Kumar Vyas, Sr. Divisional Accountant, Office of
Executive Engineer, PWD Bridge Construction Division,
Bhopal (M.P.) - 462011
Page 1 of 9
2 O.A.No. 200/00162/2023
Reserved
5. Raghvesh Pandey, Divisional Accountant Officer Grade - II,
Office of Executive Engineer, Public Health Engineering,
Anuppur (M.P.) - 484224
6. Santosh Kumar Singh, Divisional Accountant Officer Grade-
II, Office of Executive Engineer, Public Health Engineering,
Dindori (M.P.) - 481880
- Respondents
(By Advocate - Shri Sanjay Lal)
O R D E R(Final)
By Kumar Rajesh Chandra, AM:-
This Original Application has been filed by the applicant challenging the sustainability of the order dated 07.02.2023, passed by respondent nos. 2 & 3.
2. Briefly stated facts of the case of the applicant as projected in this Original Application are that the applicant is currently serving at the post of Divisional Accounts Officer, Grade-II which is a Group-B non-gazetted post. Prior to issuance of the impugned transfer order, the applicant was functioning in the office of PHE Division, Dindori. The office of Comptroller and Auditor General of India issued guideline for 'Transfer' and 'Postings' of Divisional Accounts Officers/Divisional Accountant cadre vide 20.03.2015. Page 2 of 9 3 O.A.No. 200/00162/2023
Reserved As per the said guidelines, 'Divisions' were earmarked on the basis of 'work load' and posting/transfer of certain percentage of incumbents of different cadre were specified. The communication dated 20.01.2023 made it clear that the list of eligible employees for Annual Transfer 2023 whose name find place in the enclosed 'Annexure-A' have to submit their options/preferences of stations as per their choice. The name of the applicant was at Sl. No. 43, whereas the name of the respondent no. 5 appears at Sl. No. 57 in the Appendix-A of the said communication dated 20.01.2023. The applicant has also annexed relevant extract of gradation seniority list as on 01.03.2018 (Annexure A/5), wherein the respondent no. 5 being junior to applicant was placed below in the list. The applicant filled his option form and the same was received by respondents before the due date. In that, applicant gave first preference to Anuppur, followed by Harda and Panna as his second and third preference respectively (Annexure A/8). In violation of the Transfer/Posting Policy, respondent no. 3 by the order of the respondent no. 2, passed impugned order dated 07.02.2023 whereby, contrary to the applicant's seniority position and his options, he was transferred at E.E. PWD Anuppur and his junior incumbent/respondent no.5 has been posted at Higher Division. The impugned transfer order relegates applicant to the lower Page 3 of 9 4 O.A.No. 200/00162/2023 Reserved division of Anuppur. Moreover the child of the applicant is studying in class-1 and this transfer also brings about disturbance in the academic sessions of his child. He further submitted that this Tribunal vide order dated 07.02.2023 in O.A. No. 109/2023 assailing the same transfer order granted interim relief to one Sr. DAO. He further submitted that he has been subjected to prejudice and arbitrariness. Hence, he filed this O.A..
3. The respondents have filed their reply wherein they have submitted that posting and transfers of public servants are considered/ordered in terms of administrative exigencies, that is in the larger administrative interest and no public servant has a legal right to insist on posting/transfer to a particular place/station. Thus, the applicant has no legal/statutory right to claim his posting/transfer at the place/station of his choice. The Apex Court has held in E P Royappa's case (AIR 1974 SC 555) and also in the case of N C Singhal vs UOI (AIR 1980 SC 1255) that the Govt. is the best judge to decide as to how and where the services of its employees are to be utilized. The applicant belonged to Divisional Accounts Officer Grade-II cadre and he was entitled for posting in a division categorized as medium division, in his one of the opted placed (station) i.e. his first option Anuppur. Thus, he was to be considered by the three member committee for posting as Page 4 of 9 5 O.A.No. 200/00162/2023 Reserved per provisions made in Para 4 (i) (d) (e) (g) subject to availability of division entitled for. The applicant submitted Anuppur as first place/station of choice, Harda as second choice, Panna as third choice, Sagar as fourth, Dindori as fifth choice and 34 other places/stations as his option for posting (Annexure A/8). Shri Raghvesh Pandey, DAO-II (respondent no. 5) the incumbent posted at Anuppur who is junior to Applicant, submitted Anuppur as first place/station of choice, Katni as second choice, Panna as third choice, Neemuch as fourth, Bhopal as fifth Choice and 34 other places/stations as his choice for posting. In Anuppur station, two divisions namely PWD B/R Division Anuppur and PHE Division, Anuppur with numerical value showing average percentage of workload of 0.15 and 0.18 respectively were vacant for allotment to officials belonging to DAO-II cadre. Further, two divisions namely WRD Division Anuppur and RES Division Anuppur with numerical value showing average percentage of workload 0.10 and 0.04 respectively were vacant for allotment to officials belonging to DA cadre. Thus, in Anuppur station a total of 4 divisions were vacant for allocation. Considering their first option the committee considered the name of the applicant for posting in PWD B&R Division Anuppur (Work load 0.15) and grant of additional charge of WRD Division Anuppur (Work load Page 5 of 9 6 O.A.No. 200/00162/2023 Reserved 0.10) and Shri Ragvesh Pandey (respondent no. 5) for posting in PHE Division Anuppur (Work Load 0.18) and grant additional charge of RES Division Anuppur (Work Load 0.04). Thus, the applicant was allocated divisions with workload of numerical value totaling 0.25 and Shri Ragvesh Pandey (respondent no. 5) who is junior to the applicant was allocated divisions with workload of numerical value totaling 0.22. Thus, both officials were considered by the committee for posting in the appropriately graded divisions in a station opted by them and additional charge of divisions was granted in accordance with the provisions contained in Para 4 (i)
(d) (f) and (h) of instructions issued by HQs office vide letter dated 20.03.2015. The respondents further submitted that the applicant had joined office of the Executive Engineer, PWD Division, Anuppur on 24.02.2023 (Annexure R/1) to which he was transferred vide order dated 07.02.2023 (Annexure A/9).
4. The applicant has filed rejoinder, wherein he has taken his earlier stand and further submitted that the respondents have altered the transfer policy (Annexure A/1). They have diluted the policy which is beyond their scope. The incumbent falling under category- II is relegated to perform the duties of ordinary category Divisional Accountant despite having outstanding service record. He further submitted that additional charge given to him by the respondents is Page 6 of 9 7 O.A.No. 200/00162/2023 Reserved just a camouflage to hide the arbitrariness done by the respondents to him.
5. This Tribunal has considered the matter and also perused and the pleadings and documents annexed herewith.
6. The moot question involved here is whether transfer order issued is punitive in nature and suffers from mala fide or it is done in the administrative exigency to the meet the functional requirements of the department.
7. The applicant as per his option form, filled 39 options as per his preference. The respondent while transferring the applicant to Anuppur, kept in mind the choice of the applicant as per his option form as he is given Anuppur which was his first place/station of choice. The transfer orders to the applicant and also respondent no. 5 have been issued to meet the functional requirement of the department and applicant has failed to point it out being a punitive transfer or suffering from any mala fide.
8. The contention of the applicant that his junior has been given heavier division cannot be said to be arbitrary action since the applicant has also been given an additional charge of WRD Division with work load of numerical value 0.10 and at present he is handling the both units totaling to workload of numerical value Page 7 of 9 8 O.A.No. 200/00162/2023 Reserved 0.25 and his junior (respondent no. 5) has been granted additional charge of RES Division, Anuppur, with workload of numerical value 0.04 and he is handling total workload of numerical value 0.22. The applicant has been posted as per his choice of posting by the respondents and now, even the numerical value of work load given to the applicant is more than that of the respondent no. 5, who has also been given additional charge of other unit. As such, there is no arbitrariness or mala fide shown on behalf of the respondents.
9. Respondents are free to utilize their human resource as per their administrative needs and exigencies, but it must be in accordance with the procedure established by law. The said action of the respondents in transferring the applicant cannot be said to be violative of the transfer policy as policy also gives allowance to take care of the welfare aspect as well as the administrative suitability and exigencies. The applicant has already joined his transferred place of posting.
10. In State of M.P. v. S. S. Kourav the Administrative Tribunal had interfered with the transfer order of the respondent and directed him to be posted at a particular place. It is relevant to mention that while setting aside the order of the Tribunal, Hon'ble Apex Court observed in para 4 of its judgment as follows:
4. The courts or tribunals are not appellate forums to decide on transfers of officers on administrative grounds. The wheels of Page 8 of 9 9 O.A.No. 200/00162/2023 Reserved administration should be allowed to run smoothly and the courts or tribunals are not expected to interdict the working of the administrative system by transferring the officers to proper places. It is for the administration to take appropriate decision and such decisions shall stand unless they are vitiated either by mala fides or by extraneous consideration without any factual background or foundation. In this case, we have seen that on the administrative grounds the transfer came to be issued.
Therefore, we cannot go into the expediency of posting an officer at a particular place.
11. In view of the observations made above, this Original Application is hereby dismissed. No order as to costs.
(Kumar Rajesh Chandra) (Akhil Kumar Srivastava)
Administrative Member Judicial Member
vk/-
Page 9 of 9