Central Administrative Tribunal - Ernakulam
K.P.Prasad vs Union Of India on 19 December, 2008
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL ERNAKULAM BENCH ORIGINAL APPLICATION : 750/2008.
DATED THE 19TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2008.
CORAM:
HON'BLE DR K B S RAJAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER HON'BLE DR K S SUGATHAN, ADMINISTRATIVE MEMBER K.P.Prasad, Film/Video Editor, Doordarshan Kendra, Thiruvananthapuram. ... Applicant By Advocate Mr.P.Santhosh Kumar V/s
1. Union of India represented by Secretary, Information and Broadcasting, New Delhi.
2. Prasar Bharathy (Broadcasting Corporation of India) New Delhi.
Represented by Chief Executive Officer
3. The Director General, Prasar Bharathy, (Broadcasting Corporation of India), Doordarshan Kendra, New Delhi.
4. The Director, Doordarshan Kendra, Trivandrum.
5. D.Sundararajan, Film/Video Editor, Doordarshan Kendra, Chennai. ... Respondents.
By Advocate Mr.N.S.Sugunapalan Sr Mr.S.Sujin This application having been heard on 19th December, 2008, the Tribunal on the same day delivered the following:-
(ORDER) Hon'ble Dr K B S RAJAN, Judicial Member The applicant is aggrieved by Annexure A-1 order dated 11.12.2008 whereby he stands transferred from DDK, Thiruvananthapuram to DDK, Chennai. Earlier, he was transferred from DDK, Thiruvananthapuram to DDK, Silchar against which he moved OA 444/2003 which was allowed and the applicant continued. In so far as the present transfer is concerned, the grievance of the applicant is that according to Annexure A-2 order dated 3.4.1986 and subsequent orders on the subject, the posting of an individual and his spouse should be in the same place and this concession is not extended to the applicant now.
Again, children education is yet another aspect as contained in Annexure A-3 order dated 12.6.1997 which has also not been followed in its spirit. The applicant also relies upon Annexure A-4 order dated 17.2.2005 of the Principal Bench, whereby it has been held that individuals should be posted in accordance with their fields on the basis of which they were selected. In the case of the applicant, since he has been in Kerala performing the duties relating to Malayalam programs, his transfer to Chennai is inappropriate.
2. In addition to above, it has been averred in the application that there is no All India transfer Liability in respect of Group 'C' post. The applicant has on 18.12.2008 submitted a representation bringing some of the above facts and has requested for re-consideration of his transfer. Obviously, that would not have by now been disposed of.
3. Taking into account the above aspects and the grounds raised in this OA, we feel that interest of justice would be met if a direction is given to respondents to dispose of the representation stated to have been mad by the applicant and arrive at a judicious decision. Till such time the decision is taken on the representation of the applicant, he shall not be relieved. OA is disposed of with the above directions. No costs.
K S SUGATHAN K B S RAJAN ADMINISTRATIVE MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER abp