Central Administrative Tribunal - Delhi
Shri B.D.S. Kharab, Group 'A' Irs S/O ... vs Union Of India (Uoi) Through Secretary, ... on 21 November, 2007
ORDER Meera Chhibber, Member (J)
1. By this O.A, applicant has challenged order dated 25th June, 2007, whereby he has been transferred from Delhi to Ahmedabad (page 18 at serial No. 12). It is stated by the counsel for applicant that applicant is an orthopedically handicapped person with 55% disability, which is evident from page 34 of the OA. It is also stated by the applicant that for the last over 22 years he had been kept in Delhi or areas around Delhi looking at his disability. Now he is left with only 7 years of service. Since he had completed his tenure in Delhi, he had given a representation dated 28.2.2007 wherein he had referred to a judgment given by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi and requested to look at the extreme compassionate and humanitarian grounds and he may be allowed to continue in Delhi (page-28). However, since no reply was given, he had no option but to file the present O.A. Counsel for applicant relied on OMs dated 15.2.1988, 10.5.1990 and 13.3.1002 (pages 21, 22and 23).
2. Respondents, on the other hand, have opposed the O.A. They have submitted that applicant has already completed 22 years of service in the North Area. He was also given the benefit of relaxation during 2006 by retaining him in Delhi for one more year, but relaxation cannot be given in perpetuity. There are other officers also who have to be accommodated. Applicant has been transferred to Ahmedabad in view of the existing policy. His case was put up before the Placement Committee, which decided to post him to Ahmedabad, which is a full-fledged City with good medical facilities available. They have relied on Transfer/Placement Policy of Officers dated 23.05.2007 placed at Annexure R-1 and prayed that the OA may be dismissed.
3. I have heard both the counsel and perused the pleadings as well. As per Transfer/Placement policy of Group 'A' Officers, it is clear that exceptions on compassionate / administrative grounds would be made by the Placement Committee. The O.M. dated 15.2.1988 relied upon by the counsel for applicant deals with posting/transfer of physically handicapped employed in Public Sector Banks/Financial Institutions. Since the subject itself relates to the employees in Public Sector Banks/Financial Institutions, this would not enhance the case of the applicant. However, a subsequent OM dated 10.5.1990 read with OM dated 13.3.2002 would be relevant in the case of applicant. These for ready reference read as under:
Government of India, Ministry of Personnel Public Grievances and Pensions, Department of Personnel and Training, New Delhi, dated May 10, 1990.
Office Memorandum Subject: Posting of Physically Handicapped Candidates The undersigned is directed to say that a suggestion has been made that physically handicapped candidates appointed under the Government should preferably be posted in their native places or at least in their native district. The matter has been examined carefully. It may not be possible or desirable to lay down that physically handicapped employees belonging to Group-A or Group-B who have all India transfer liability should be posted near their native places. However, in case of holders or Group-C or Group-D posts who have been recruited on regional basis and who are physically handicapped, such persons may be given posting, as far as possible, subject to administrative constraints, near their native places within the region.
2. Requests from physically handicapped employees for transfer to or near their native places may also be given preference.
3. Suitable instructions may also be issued to all subordinate offices.
Government of India, Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions, Department of Personnel and Trainees Office Memorandum New Delhi, dated 13th March, 2002 Office Memorandum Subject: Posting of Physically Handicapped candidates.
Reference this Department's O.M. No. AB- 14017/4/41/41/90-Estt (RR) dated 10.5.1990 (copy enclosed) on the above subject.
It is clarified that the guideline contained in this Department's O.M. dated 10.5.1990 that requests from physically handicapped employees for transfer to or near their native places may also be given preference, covers physically handicapped employees in Group A, B, C and D.
3. Suitable instructions may also be issued to all subordinate offices, etc.
4. Hindi version will follow.
4. Perusal of above would show that initially Government had felt that it was not desirable to give preference to Group 'A' and 'B' Officers, who have all India transfer liability in the matter of posting to near their native places, but subsequently in the year 2002 it was decided that guidelines contained in OM dated 10.5.1990 would cover the cases of Group 'A' and 'B' officers also if they are physically handicapped. In view of this, it is clear that at least request of physically handicapped persons belonging to Group 'A' and 'B' is also to be considered in the matter of posting to near their native place.
5. It is not disputed by applicant that he has been in Delhi or areas around Delhi for over the last 22 years and that he has already completed his tenure in Delhi, therefore, applicant cannot claim as a matter of right that he should be posted in Delhi throughout his service. After all, there are other officers also, who may be having problems also. However, one thing is for sure, that applicant had a right to be considered for compassionate posting in or around his native place. Since counsel for the respondents had submitted his case was put up before the Placement Committee, I wanted to see whether his case had been put up before the Placement Committee by demonstrating that he is a physically handicapped person. I had accordingly directed counsel for respondents to produce the file to see whether the Placement Committee had considered this aspect or not. Counsel for respondents has produced the minutes of the Placement Committee meeting held in May 2007, but perusal of same shows that no such details were placed before the Placement Committee that applicant is an orthopedically disabled person. In the remarks column, it is only shown that: 'stay in North Area complete. As per vacancies and transfer policy'. Since Government has already issued specific O.Ms with regard to posting of physically handicapped persons, I feel that at least the case of applicant should have been placed before the Placement Committee with all those particulars so that they could have considered the case in the right earnest keeping in view the Office Memorandum dated 10th May, 1998 read with OM dated 13th March, 2002. This not having been done, the OA is being disposed off by directing respondents to place all the facts before the Placement Committee so that they may consider his case in view of above OMs and to see whether he could be accommodated in Delhi or at any other places near to Delhi or near his native place, of course, keeping in view the vacancy position. Final orders in this regard should be passed by respondents within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order under intimation to the applicant.
6. With the above direction, OA stands disposed off. Status quo shall be maintained till such time. There shall be no order as to costs.