Central Administrative Tribunal - Allahabad
Chandr Shekhar Singh Yadav vs Central Ordnance Depot on 25 April, 2022
Open Court
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
ALLAHABAD BENCH
ALLAHABAD.
(This the 25th day of April, 2022)
Original Application No.808/2021
Hon'ble Mr. Tarun Shridhar, Member (A)
Hon'ble Ms. Pratima K Gupta, Member (J)
1. P. No. 6969246, Chandra Shekhar Singh Yadav, Aged about 43
years, working as Sr. Material Assistant, COD, Chheoki, Naini,
Prayagraj.
. . .Applicant
By Advocates : Shri Manish Kumar Yadav
Shri Lal Mani Singh
VERSUS
1. Union of India through through the Secretary, Ministry of
Defence, Department of Production, Sourth Block, New Delhi.
2. Director General Ordnance Services, Master General of Ordnance
Brance, Integrated HQ of MoD (Army), Sena Bhawan, New
Delhi.
3. Officer-in-Charge Record, A.O.C. (Army Ordnance Corps)
Records, Secunderabad, Pin. 900453. C/o 56 APO.
4. The Commandant, Central Ordnance Depot (COD), Chheoki),
Naini, Prayagraj, Pin - 900479. C/o 56 APO.
5. The Commandant, Ordnance Depot (OD), Fort, Prayagraj. Pin.
908778, C/o 56 APO.
. . .Respondents
By Advocate: Shri Ajay Kumar Rai
Page 1 of 7
ORDER
Delivered by Hon'ble Mr. Tarun Shridhar, Member (A) We have joined this Division Bench online through video conferencing.
02. Shri Lal Mani Singh, learned counsel for the applicant is present. Shri Ajay Kumar Rai and Shri Manoj Kumar Sharma, learned counsels for the respondents are present.
03. The applicant is aggrieved by an order dated 23.03.2021 and other order dated 21.09.2021 whereby he has been transferred and redeployed from COD, Chheoki and posted in different units of COD, Kanpur. By virtue of the present Original Application, the applicant seeks the following relief:-
" 1. Issue an order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned posting/redployment order dated 23.03.2021 (so far as it relates to the applicant) and order dated 21.09.2021 (Annexure A-1 & A-2 to the OA) passed by the Respondent No.3.
2. Issue an order or directions, in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to post/redeploy to the applicant at OD Fort, Allahabad due considering the provisions of disbandment policy in as much as vacancy position exists there.
Page 2 of 7
3. Issue any other and further orders or directions, which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.
4. Award the cost o the OA in favour of the Applicant.
04. Learned counsel for the applicant takes us briefly through the history of the case where on account of reorganization of the Ordnance Depots/Units of the Indian Army, which has also led to disbanding of certain units of the Ordnance Depots, the staffs of these Depots have been redeployed and transferred to several other units.
05. Learned counsel submits that prior to this reorganization and disbandment of certain units, the respondents had issued detailed guidelines which would govern the transfer of the employees of the disbanded units in pursuance to the redeployment. Learned counsel submits that the respondents have not adhered to the guidelines which they themselves had notified while carrying out the redeployment and transfer.
06. Learned counsel particularly draws attention to the Army Order No. 12/2020/MP-4 issued by the Adjutant General's Branch. Para 13 of the said order reads as under:_ " Employees with longer service in their present post/grade will as far as possible, be offered employment at the same station or near about and only junior Page 3 of 7 employees will be posted to farther stations if vacancies in the same station or nearby station are not available. Surplus employees may be posted in equivalent posts with substantially identical duties on a regular basis of lower appointments, if vacancies in the same trade/appointment are not available. In such cases prior consent of the individual should be obtained in writing."
07. Learned counsel drawing attention to the redeployment and the transfer order, submits that the junior employees have been adjusted in Allahabad and nearby places whereas employees with longer service have been transferred to far off units. Thus the order needs to be quashed, as it is contrary to the provisions of para 13. He also draws attention to the subsequent order referred as Roadmap for Redeployment of Defence Civilian Employees bearing no. 15989/Surplus Gen/MP- 4(Civ)D(AF)(Part) dated 06th Oct 2020. Learned counsel mentions that that this order categorically states that Group 'C' Civilian Employees shall be posted within a radius of 50 Kms from the disbanded units, subject to availability of suitable vacancies. Learned counsel draws attention to the documents annexed in O.A. establishing that sufficient numbers of vacancies are available wherein the applicant could be suitably adjusted.
08. Learned counsel further submits that since the wife of the applicant is an employee of State Government posted in Allahabad, on Page 4 of 7 this ground too, the applicant deserves a sympathetic consideration by posting him at the same station as his wife.
09. Shri M K Sharma and Shri Ajay Kumar Rai, learned counsels for the respondents argue that the guidelines referred to by the learned counsel for the applicant by their very nature are only guidelines and not a binding document. Reading from the language of the said guidelines, learned counsels submit that the order issued by the Adjutant General's Branch mentions that employee with longer service shall be offered employment at the same station as far as possible. Similarly, the roadmap referred to by the learned counsel for the applicant also mentions that Group 'C' employees can be transferred beyond 50 Kms and the adjustment within 50 Kms radius will be done only if feasible. Learned counsels go on to argue that since the unit where the applicant was employed has been disbanded, the only option before the respondents is to transfer and deploy him wherever vacancy is available and where there is requirement of such an employee. Moreover, the learned counsels go on to argue that the impugned order is the transfer order covering a large number of employees and the applicant cannot claim to be aggrieved by it or allege any prejudice on the part of the respondents. Since, the matter involves restructuring of the organization, it is not for the tribunal to interfere with the said order.
12. Learned counsels further submit that there is no change or adverse impact upon the service conditions of the applicant and, transfer and redeployment are an essential part of service.
Page 5 of 7
13. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and gone through the documents on record, particularly the ones referred to by the learned counsel for the parties. It is not disputed that there has been a restructuring of the Ordnance Depots leading to disbanding of certain units and merger of certain other units. It is also not disputed that such a reorganization/restructuring has necessitated redeployment and transfer of the employees posted in such units to other units. The limited controversy at hand is whether such redeployment and transfer with respect to the applicant has been done in accordance with the guidelines on the subject. Accordingly, we are of the view that it is appropriate to dispose of this Original Application with a direction to the competent authority amongst the respondents that the order of redeployment/transfer be reconsidered/reviewed against the background of their guidelines contained in Army Order 12/2020/MP-4, in particular para 13 and the provisions of roadmap issued on 06th October, 2020. We leave it to the good sense and the judgment of the competent authority to take an appropriate and objective decision in the matter. We offer a liberty of one week to the applicant to file a comprehensive representation before the appropriate authority in case he so wishes.
13. The competent authority amongst the respondents is further directed to take a well-considered and objective decision in the matter within a period of 8 weeks from the date of this order. Page 6 of 7
14. The Interim protection awarded to the applicant shall remain operative till the competent authority takes an appropriate decision in pursuance to the directions issued in Para 13 above.
15. With the aforesaid directions, the O.A. stands disposed off.
16. No order as to costs.
(Ms Pratima K Gupta) (Tarun Shridhar)
Member-J Member-A
/PR/
Page 7 of 7