Central Administrative Tribunal - Jaipur
Vijay Singh Dhakar vs D/O Post on 9 November, 2021
1
OA No. 847/2016
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR
ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO. 847/2016
Order reserved on 28.10.2021
DATE OF ORDER: 09.11.2021
CORAM
HON'BLE MR. DINESH SHARMA, ADMINISTRATIVE MEMBER
HON'BLE MRS. HINA P. SHAH, JUDICIAL MEMBER
Vijay Singh S/o Sh. Chotte Lal Dhakar, aged about 52
years, resident of Quarter No. 18, P & T Colony,
Rajendra Nagar, Scheme No. 4, Alwar, presently
working on the post of Postman, Alwar (HQ).
....Applicant
Shri B.K. Jatti, counsel for applicant.
VERSUS
1. Union of India through Secretary (Posts) /
Director General, Department of Posts, New
Delhi.
2. Chief Post Master General, Indian Postal
Department Rajasthan Circle, Head Office, Anand
Bhawan, Sansar Chand Road, Jaipur.
3. Director of Postal Services, Indian Postal
Department, Rajasthan Circle, Head Office,
Anand Bhawan, Sansar Chand Road, Jaipur.
4. The Senior Superintendent of Post Offices, Alwar
Division, Indian Postal Department, Alwar.
5. Shri Ram Khiladi, Post Master, Postal
Department, Alwar (HO), Alwar.
6. Shri Mohan Singh Meena, Office Superintendent,
Division Office (HO), Postal Department, Moti
Dungri Alwar.
7. Shri Chandresh Meena (ASP), Divisional Office
(OD), Postal Department, Alwar.
2
OA No. 847/2016
8. Shri Dev Prakash Sharma, Postal Assistant, SPM,
Bhadurpur Postal Department, Alwar.
.... Respondents
Shri Rajendra Vaish, counsel for respondent Nos. 1 to 4.
ORDER
Per: Hina P. Shah, Judicial Member The present Original Application has been filed by the applicant under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 praying for quashing and setting aside the impugned order dated 07.12.2016, (Annexure-1), by which the applicant has been transferred from Alwar HO to Laxmangarh SO.
2. The brief facts of the case, as stated by the applicant, are that he was initially working as GDS and then promoted as Postmaster and was posted at Alwar (HO), Alwar. His service record is outstanding and has received several certificates. He along with his family is residing at Quarter No. 18 allotted to him by the Department and respondent No. 8 (Shri Dev Prakash Sharma) is residing at Quarter No. 17 in the same colony. Due to misbehaviour on the part of son of respondent No. 8, there was a complaint and FIR registered against his son. Due to registration of 3 OA No. 847/2016 criminal case, harassment started against the applicant and due to some pressure, respondent No. 5 vide order dated 01.02.2016, cancelled the allotment of Quarter No. 18 (Type-II) and was asked to vacate the same immediately. Applicant was granted temporary injunction vide order dated 08.02.2016 by which respondents were directed not to disposes the applicant from the said quarter. In revenge, respondents constituted Transfer & Placement Committee, which met on 07.12.2016 and on recommendation of the said Committee, applicant was transferred from Alwar HO to Laxmangarh SO without disclosing any reasons for the transfer. Thus, being aggrieved by the transfer order dated 07.12.2016 (Annexure A/1), applicant has approached this Tribunal for redressal of his grievance.
3. After issue of notices, the official respondent Nos. 1 to 4 have filed their reply stating that the applicant got promotion to the post of Postman by qualifying departmental competitive examination. He was allotted Quarter No. 18 (Type-II) Alwar vide memo dated 15.07.2011. He was habitual absentee and his approach towards duty and neighbours was disputed. 4 OA No. 847/2016 There was a serious quarrel between the families of applicant and respondent No. 8 residing in Quarter No. 17 and both had made their complaints to SSPOs Alwar and also both had lodged FIRs in Police Station against each other. A departmental enquiry was conducted through IG (PG) Alwar and report of Inquiry Officer dated 21.01.2016 is annexed at Annexure R/9. As seen, applicant did not appear before the Inquiry Officer despite several efforts and remained absent from duty. In the said enquiry report, the family of the applicant was wholly responsible for the quarrel. Also in the criminal complaint, as investigated by S.H.O. Mahila Police Thana, Alwar it was found that allegation of so called provocation was false. After the said incident, the allotment of the residential Quarter No. 18 of the applicant was cancelled vide letter dated 01.02.2016 with immediate effect. Against the said letter dated 01.02.2016, applicant filed a case before the Court of Civil & Judicial Magistrate No. 1, Alwar. Due to the said incident, respondent No. 8, the then PA, Alwar HO was transferred & posted as SPM, Bahadurpur. But on educational ground of children of respondent No. 8, Quarter No. 17 was allowed to be retained by him. There are several instances of 5 OA No. 847/2016 quarrel of the applicant not only with respondent No. 8 but also with other neighbours. Accordingly, applicant was also transferred vide order dated 07.12.2016, which is the impugned order in challenge.
4. The applicant has filed a rejoinder denying the contentions raised by the official respondents. The applicant further added that medical leave and casual leave is taken by an employee when it is necessary. In criminal matters, department cannot act as a disciplinary authority. No reason whatsoever has been given by the respondents in cancelling quarter of the applicant and he was granted interim relief by Court of Civil & Judicial Magistrate vide order dated 08.02.2016 by which respondents were directed not to disposes him from the said quarter. Respondent No. 8 is transferred to Alwar Division itself, on the other hand, applicant is transferred to Laxmangarh. Thus, action of respondents in transferring the applicant is arbitrary, illegal and in violation of provisions of transfer as well as said transfer will cause loss in seniority as his Division/ unit is changed and, therefore, the present Original Application be allowed. 6 OA No. 847/2016
5. Heard learned counsels for the parties and examined the material available on record.
6. The applicant as well as official respondents reiterated their stand as stated earlier.
7. The factual matrix of the case is that the applicant was working as GDS and got promotion as Postman after passing departmental examination was posted at Alwar Head Post Office in Alwar Division since 14.10.2010. He was allotted residential quarter No. 18 (Type-II) at Postal Colony Scheme No. 4, Alwar vide SSPOs order dated 15.07.2011. Respondent No. 8 was occupying Quarter No. 17 and there was complaint of provocation by son of respondent No. 8 towards the daughter of applicant and for that incident complaints were lodged by both the parties against each other to the SSPO as well towards police by filing FIRs. In departmental enquiry, in spite of several chances provided to the applicant, he did not attend the enquiry and the same was concluded ex-parte wherein applicant was held guilty and found responsible for the quarrel as per the enquiry report of IP (PG), Alwar 7 OA No. 847/2016 dated 21.01.2016. The criminal cases lodged by the parties are under trial before the competent court.
8. It is seen that after the enquiry conducted by the official respondents, the allotment of the residential Quarter No. 18 of the applicant was cancelled with immediate effect vide SSPOs Alwar letter dated 01.02.2016. Also on the other hand, official respondents transferred respondent No. 8 as SPM Bahadurpur, but respondent No. 8 submitted an application for retention of his quarter since his children are taking education and he was allowed to retain quarter No. 17 upto 11.04.2017 by the official respondents. Thereafter, applicant filed a case before the Court of Civil and Judicial Magistrate, Alwar against cancellation of his quarter No. 18 and applicant had brought temporary injunction on eviction of quarters from the said court vide order dated 08.02.2016. In the meanwhile, one more complaint vide letter dated 21.10.2016, (Annexure R/12), was received from respondent No. 8 against the applicant about danger to his life as applicant and his family had threatened respondent No. 8 of dire consequences. The said matter was enquired by ASP 8 OA No. 847/2016 (OD) Alwar. Thus, it was decided that in order to maintain peace in locality and maintain decorum of the Postal colony and also noting that several instances of complaints lodged not only by respondent No. 8 but several others including oral complaint of one Shri Maganlal Soni against the applicant, some action was required to be taken. The applicant was, thus, transferred out of Alwar. Official respondents state that not only the applicant but also the respondent No. 8 was also transferred. Accordingly, the Transfer & Placement Committee had a meeting on 07.12.2016 and it was decided that the applicant be transferred under the provisions of Rule 37 of P & T Vol. IV from Alwar HO to Laxmangarh SO.
9. Coming to the grounds raised by the applicant, it is seen that none of them are convincing as applicant has been transferred within the same district and from one sub unit to another sub unit. The records of the applicant cannot be said to be clean and unblemished as there are series of complaints available on record regarding quarrels between applicant with his colleagues and their family members. Seeing the nature of events occurred at the residential complex 9 OA No. 847/2016 and to maintain the decorum of the Postal Colony, the action has been taken by official respondents in transferring the applicant in the interest of justice. Thus, the same cannot be said to be in violation of rules as the same is in consonance of Transfer & Placement Committee.
10. Due to transfer, there are bound to be difficulties coming in the way of the employees but as far as transfer of the applicant under Rule 37 of P & T Vol. IV is concerned, the Principal Bench of this Tribunal vide its order dated 15.01.2008 in the case of Deepal Verma vs. Union of India & Ors., it has been observed that Competent Authority has powers to transfer an employee under Rule 37 of P & T Vol. IV anywhere in India in the interest of work. Thus, in the present transfer order, we do not find any illegality or arbitrariness in the action of the official respondents as the same is just and proper.
11. It is to be noted that in transfer of a government employee, scope of judicial review is very limited and the same cannot be interfered unless the orders are passed in colourable exercise of power, the same is 10 OA No. 847/2016 passed in violation of rules or passed by incompetent authority. It is clear that wheels of administration cannot be interfered by the Courts or Tribunals and they cannot act as an Appellate Authority to decide who should be placed at which place as it is to be left to the Authority to decide. May be the Administration may fill the post or keep the post vacant in Organizational interest as it is they who know as to which person can be adjusted seeing his grievances and taking into consideration other factors in the interest of the Organization. In the present case, the applicant has failed to point out any violation of rule or guidelines by the official respondents. Thus, in an All India Transfer liability, no person has a right to a particular post and the same has been observed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in number of cases.
12. The Hon'ble Apex Court in series of judgments have time and again reiterated that the order of transfer made even in transgression of administrative guidelines cannot also be interfered with, as they do not confer any legally enforceable rights, unless the same are vitiated by malafides or is made in violation of any statutory provisions.
11OA No. 847/2016
13. In view of the discussions made herein-above, we do not find any reason for interference in the impugned order dated 07.12.2016, (Annexure-1), as the same is just and proper and the Original Application being devoid of any merits deserves to be dismissed. Accordingly, Original Application is dismissed. No order as to costs.
14. Since O.A. is dismissed, thus, MA No. 529/2017 for vacation of interim relief stands disposed of. Accordingly, the interim relief of status quo granted in favour of the applicant vide order dated 20.12.2016 stands vacated.
(HINA P. SHAH) (DINESH SHARMA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ADMINISTRATIVE MEMBER /nlk/