Central Administrative Tribunal - Chandigarh
Yadwinder Singh vs Posts on 25 May, 2022
1
OA.No.170/60/1421/2021 CAT/Chandigarh Bench
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
CHANDIGARH BENCH, CHANDIGARH
ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.170/60/1421/2021
ORDER RESERVED ON: 03.03.2022
DATE OF ORDER: 25.05.2022
CORAM:
HON'BLE SHRI SURESH KUMAR MONGA, MEMBER (J)
(On video conference from Central Administrative Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench
at Chandigarh)
HON'BLE SHRI RAKESH KUMAR GUPTA, MEMBER (A)
(On video conference from Central Administrative Tribunal, Bangalore Bench
at Bangalore)
Yadwinder Singh, Aged about 37 year, S/o Sh. Atma Singh, R/o Ward No.1,
Preet Nagar, College Road, Mansa-151 505 (Punjab), former Sub Post Master
(Group 'C') Post Office, Boha, Bathinda Dn. ....Applicant
(By Advocate Shri Shri Jaswinder Singh - through video conference)
Vs.
1. Union of India, through Secretary to Govt. of India, Dept. of Posts, Dak
Bhawan, New Delhi-110 001.
2. Ms. Manisha Bansal Badal, PMG Punjab West Region, Sandesh Bhawan,
Sector 17-E, Chandigarh-160 017.
3. The Director Postal Services, Office of PMG Punjab West Region, Sandesh
Bhawan, Sector 17-E, Chandigarh-160 017.
4. Superintendent Post Offices, Bathinda Division, HPO, Bathinda-152 001
....Respondents
(By Advocate, Shri Sh. Sanjay Goyal, Senior Central Government Standing
Counsel- through video conference)
2
OA.No.170/60/1421/2021 CAT/Chandigarh Bench
ORDER
PER: RAKESH KUMAR GUPTA, MEMBER (A)
1. The applicant has filed the present Original Application under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act 1985 seeking the following relief:
a) Quash the transfer order issued by respondent no.4 (Superintendent Post Offices Bathinda Division, Bathinda) vide Memo No. B/710/2021 dated 10.12.2021 (Annexure A-1) vide which the applicant has been transferred from Bathinda Postal division to the post of Postal Assistant, Dasuya HO, Hoshiarpur Postal Division.
b) Quash Memo No. STB-R/1-34/2000 dated 09.12.2021, issued by respondent No.2 (Post Master General West Punjab Region, Chandigarh), (Annexure A-3) vide which the applicant has been transferred from Bhatinda Division and allotted to Hoshiarpur Division under the provisions contained in Rule 37 of Postal Manual Volume IV with immediate effect.
2. The facts of the case as pleaded by the applicant in his pleadings, are as follows:
a) The applicant joined the respondent Department as Postal Assistant on 01.05.2008 in Bathinda Postal Division. He was posted as S.P.M (PA) Boha Sub-Post Office, Bathinda Division w.e.f. 01.08.2018.
b) The applicant was transferred from Boha Sub-Post Office, Bathinda Division to Bhagta Bhai S.O Bathinda Division in the interest of service vide order dated 08.09.2021 issued by Respondent No.4. 3
OA.No.170/60/1421/2021 CAT/Chandigarh Bench
c) The applicant could not join at the new station of his posting i.e. Bhagta Bhai S.O., due to indisposition & has been regularly submitting Medical Certificates of illness to Respondent No.4 since 13.09.2021.
d) The applicant has been transferred to Dasuya Head Post Office in Hoshiarpur Division vide transfer order dated 10.12.2021 issued by Respondent No.4. This order has been issued under Rule 37 of Postal Manual Volume IV ostensibly on "administrative ground and in the interest of service".
e) Along with the said transfer order dated 10.12.2021, the applicant also received the order dated 09.12.2021 issued by Respondent No.2 vide which order has been conveyed for Inter Division/Unit transfer of the applicant from Bathinda to Hoshiarpur Division., under Rule 37 of Postal Manual Volume IV on administrative ground and in the interest of service.
f) The heading of the said transfer order dated 10.12.2021 reads "Office of Inspector Posts, East Sub Division, Bathinda", wherein it has been signed by Respondent No.4 i.e. Superintendent Post Offices Bathinda Division, Bathinda, a superior/senior officer of the former (Inspector Posts, East Sub Division Bathinda).
g) The reason given for the Inter-Division transfer is that "as the official was under transfer to Bhagta Bhai SO and he did not join his duty till date and was submitting Medical Certificate of illness from Private 4 OA.No.170/60/1421/2021 CAT/Chandigarh Bench RMP doctor since 13.09.2021, hence the name of the official is hereby struck off from Bathinda Division."
h) The applicant submitted medical certificate of illness given by the Registered Medical Practitioner (RMP) to Respondent No.4 and if the latter had any doubt about the veracity/ genuineness of the medical certificate, Respondent No.4 could have referred them to the Civil Surgeon/ Chief Medical Officer of the District as per Rule 19 of CCS (Leave) Rules, 1972 and in case the Civil Surgeon expressed any contrary opinion about the state of health of the applicant, the respondents were at liberty to take appropriate action as per Statutory Rules.
i) However, the Respondent No.4 appears to have recommended to Respondent No.2 to transfer the applicant to another Division i.e. Hoshiarpur Division under Rule 37 of Postal Manual Volume-IV which is punitive in nature.
j) The impugned Inter-unit/Division transfer to Hoshiarpur Division shall have cascading effect of placing the applicant at the tail end of gradation list of Postal Assistants of Hoshiarpur Division and, therefore, the applicant shall suffer loss of seniority for no fault of the applicant and therefore shall be subjected to double jeopardy which is not legally sustainable.
k) The applicant belongs to the Scheduled Caste and he is being constantly under fire and is being victimised, subjected to 5 OA.No.170/60/1421/2021 CAT/Chandigarh Bench discrimination and harassed from the very beginning by Respondent No.2 and various officials holding the post of SPOs Bathinda Division/ Respondent No.4.
l) The representation dated 29.05.2020 of the applicant regarding recovery from Salary, was pending with Respondent No.2 for which the applicant was constrained to approach this Tribunal vide O.A. No.141/2021 and it is only after this Tribunal issued directions for deciding the pending representation in one month, that respondent No.2 decided the same.
m) Respondent No.2 is one of the respondents in O.A. No.424/2021 filed by the applicant in connection with Charge Sheet under Rule 14 of CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965.
n) The applicant has given a statement by name against Respondent No.2 in the ongoing Police Investigation in complaint dated 23.06.2021, lodged by the applicant to Mansa Police due to which Respondent No.2 is annoyed with the applicant and nurses a grudge against the applicant.
o) The APAR of the applicant for the period 06.06.2020 to 27.10.2020 has been spoiled by the then SPOs Bathinda Division, due to extraneous reasons, not related to the work and conduct of the applicant as SPM Boha Sub Post Office.
3. The respondents have filed their written statement wherein they have averred as follows:
6
OA.No.170/60/1421/2021 CAT/Chandigarh Bench
a) The applicant while working as SPM Boha SO was habitual to submit medical certificates of illness for the past two years. He did not attend his duty approximately for 470 days at frequent intervals since, 2019 by submitting medical certificates of illness from different doctors located at different stations.
b) The official was directed several times to attend the office of Civil Surgeon Mansa on any working day vide letters dated 30.07.2019, 20.08.2020, 16.07.2020. The Senior Medical Officer, Civil Hospital Mansa also made correspondence several times with the applicant to appear before the medical board formed for acquiring Second Medical Opinion. However, instead of appearing before the board, he made correspondence with the Sr. Medical Officer, Civil Hospital Mansa that he is not capable to relieve himself and that he is not a subordinate of office of Senior Medical Officer, Civil Hospital Mansa, hence the Sr. Medical Officer should avoid these types of directions to him.
c) The applicant never attended the Civil Hospital Mansa for getting second medical opinion as instructed by the office of answering respondents in this regard. Due to this, a charge sheet has also been issued to the official under Rule 14 of CCS (CCA) 1965, and the enquiry of the same was under process. The applicant started to make complaints against the Inquiry Officer and also moved this Tribunal in O.A. No.424/2021 challenging the chargesheet issued against him.
d) The pay of the official was withheld for want of issue of leave orders for the period of his absence. The applicant started to make false complaints 7 OA.No.170/60/1421/2021 CAT/Chandigarh Bench against the officers and officials of the department to higher authorities and also to Police authorities.
e) From the very beginning of his service i.e. from 2008, the official was mostly posted at stations nearby to his hometown i.e. Mansa, which shows that there is no discrimination made against him by the department. The past posting profile of the official is as under: -
S.N Office of Posting Period of Posting
1 Bathinda HO 01.05.2008 to 15.05.2012
2 Bathinda City SO 15.05.2012 to 26.04.2013
3 Mansa MDG 27.04.2013 to 31.07.2018
4 Boha SO 01.08.2018 to 12.09.2021
5 Bhagta Bhai SO Official posted at this office vide memo dated
08.09.2021 on completion of tenure with
TA/TP. Official was relieved from Boha SO
on 13.09.2021 but he has not joined at Bhagta
Bhai SO and continuously submitted medical
certificate of illness issued by private doctor of Bathinda and never presented himself to CMO Bathinda for second medical opinion as instructed by Supt. Post Offices, Bathinda Division from time to time.
8
OA.No.170/60/1421/2021 CAT/Chandigarh Bench
f) A separate charge sheet under Rule 16 of CCS (CCA) Rules 1965 was issued to the applicant vide letter dated 07.12.2021 due to his repeated false complaints on various platforms i.e. Twitter, PG portal and other platforms alleging non receipt of his SB and TD passbooks from Budhlada SO, in lieu of the amount tendered by him at the Counter of Budhlada SO. A police complaint has also been made against the applicant by Supdt. Post Offices, Bathinda Division, Bathinda vide letter dated 10.12.2021 on the basis of legal opinion, as he was continuously trying to blackmail the staff of Budhlada SO.
g) The transfer orders have been issued on the recommendations of a duly constituted Transfer and Placement Committee, who recommended the transfer of the official in the interest of service and on administrative grounds after considering all facts and circumstances of the case vide office of the PMG, Punjab West Region, Chandigarh Memo dated 09.12.2021 under Rule 37 of Postal Manual IV.
h) The native place of the applicant as per Service Record is Mansa and the applicant belongs to SC Category. The transfer order has no relevance with the caste of the official and transfer orders have been issued in the interest of service and on administrative grounds duly recommended by the Transfer and Placement Committee after considering all facts and circumstances of the case.
i) The allegation of bias against the applicant on account of his caste status, raised by the official is completely baseless as not even a single 9 OA.No.170/60/1421/2021 CAT/Chandigarh Bench complaint of any other SC employee came to light apart from the present applicant in Bathinda Division.
j) The official is not only habitual of submitting Medical Certificate of illness, but also habitual of lodging complaints against the officials and officers of the Department with police authorities. He had made complaints with police authority against several staff members including three former SPOs of Bathinda Division i.e. Shri Sunil Kumar, Shri Manjinder Singh and Shri Mahesh Bindal. He has also made police complaints against Shri Parshotam Dass Retd Postmaster Bathinda several times, Shri Lavish Kumar Garg, Postmaster Bathinda and Smt. Renu Bansal, Accountant, Bathinda HO.
k) Due to his involvement in various malicious activities, the transfer under rule 37 of the official was proposed by the SPOs Bathinda and was examined in details by duly constituted Transfer and Placement Committee after considering all facts and circumstances of the case and the recommendation of the said committee was further approved by the Postmaster General, Punjab, West Region, Chandigarh vide memo dated 09.12.2021.
4. In his rejoinder to the reply filed by the respondents, the applicant has averred as follows:
a) The written statement filed by the respondents has been submitted by Shri Gokul C.V., Sr. Supdt. Post Offices, Hoshiarpur Division., whereas 10 OA.No.170/60/1421/2021 CAT/Chandigarh Bench the matter in the O.A. relates to Bathinda Dn. and the Superintendent, Post Offices, Bathinda Division is respondent No.4 in the present OA.
b) Since, the facts of the present case relate to the Bathinda Division, these facts cannot be true to the knowledge and belief of the said Mr. Gokul C.V. Due to this reason, the Written Statement filed under the signatures of the said Shri. Gokul C.V, Sr. Supt. Post Offices Hoshiarpur Division, is not legally tenable and therefore cannot be taken on record.
c) The order of the respondents in transferring him for the second time in a span of three months and that too out of Bathinda Division, is punitive in nature and is highly discriminatory and arbitrary.
d) The applicant is diagnosed with post covid care due to which he could not join at Bhagta Bhai S.O. and has been submitting medical certificate of illness w.e.f. 13.09.2021.
e) The meeting of the Transfer and Placement Committee was arbitrarily, irregularly and unjustifiably held in the office of respondent No.2/ PMG Punjab West Region, Chandigarh and the transfer has been done in a mala fide manner at the behest of Respondent No.2 who is biased against the applicant.
f) The respondents are themselves stating that the applicant is not only habitual of submitting medical certificate of illness but also habitual of lodging complaints against officials and officers of the Department. This shows that the respondents have penalized the applicant due to extraneous considerations. The Hon'ble Apex Court has held in Somesh 11 OA.No.170/60/1421/2021 CAT/Chandigarh Bench Tiwari vs UOI [AIR 2009 SC 1399]-'It is one thing to say that the employer is entitled to pass an order of transfer in administrative exigencies but it is another thing to say that the order of transfer is passed by way of or lieu of punishment. When an order of Transfer is passed in lieu of punishment, the same is liable to be set aside being wholly illegal'.
5. Heard learned counsels for the parties and perused the pleadings made by them.
6. In the present case, the applicant has challenged the inter divisional transfer order issued under Rule 37 of Postal Manual Volume-IV vide which he has been transferred from Bhatinda Division to Hoshiarpur Division. This Transfer order has been issued by Superintendent Post Offices Bathinda Division, Bathinda in pursuance to Memo No. STB-R/1-34/2020 dated 09.12.2021 issued by the office of the Postmaster General, Punjab West Region, Sandesh Bhawan, Chandigarh. The applicant has been transferred from Bathinda Division to Hoshiarpur Division based on the recommendations of the Transfer and Placement Committee, which held its meeting on 08.12.2021.
7. Perusal of the copies of various documents enclosed by the respondents in their written statement inter-alia indicate that the applicant had been continuously submitting medical certificates of illness w.e.f. 05.04.2019 as follows:
05.04.2019 to 14.04.2019- Dr. Yashpal Singh Mansa reg.no.10089 12 OA.No.170/60/1421/2021 CAT/Chandigarh Bench
08.05.2019 to 14.05.2019- Dr. Yashpal Singh Mansa reg.no.10089 15.05.2019 to 21.05.2019- Dr. Harbans Singh Narula Gaushala Road Mansa 22.05.2019 to 28.05.2019- Dr. Yashpal Singh Mansa reg no,10089 01.06.2019 to 06.06.2019- Dr. Harbans Singh Narula Gaushala Road Mansa 08.06.2019 to 14.06.2019- Dr. Yashpal Singh Mansa reg no,10089 26.06.2019 to 02.07.2019- Dr. Harbans Singh Narula Gaushala Road Mansa 02.07.2019 to 08.07.2019- Dr. Harbans Singh Narula Gaushala Road Mansa 13.07.2019 to 19.07.2019- Dr. Harbans Singh Narula Gaushala Road Mansa 25.07.2019 to 01.08.2019- Dr. Harbans Singh Narula Gaushala Road Mansa
8. Accordingly, the case had been referred by the respondents to Civil Surgeon, Civil Hospital, Mansa for second medical opinion. The applicant had been informed and directed to attend the office of the Civil Surgeon, Civil Hospital, Mansa for second opinion.
9. However, despite repeated requests, the applicant did not appear before the Medical Board and had even gone to the extent of replying to the Senior Medical Officer, that it will not be feasible for him to appear before the Medical Board.
10. The Transfer and Placement Committee in its meeting held on 08.12.2021 in respect of transfers and posting under the provisions of Rule 37 of Postal Manual Volume-IV had noted as follows with regards to the applicant:-
(i) He has made false complaint dated 01.08.2020 regarding stoppage of his pay for irregular absence.13
OA.No.170/60/1421/2021 CAT/Chandigarh Bench
(ii) The official had got published an article related to official matter in Dainik Jagran Bathinda dated 21.07.2020. Another article related to official matter was published on 20.07.2020 in Truthway Newspapaer Bathinda in violation to Rule 8 and Rule 19 of CCS (Conduct), Rules, 1964.
(iii) On 09.07.2020, he has filed a false complaint regarding investigation of record of computer related hardware equipments condemned in Bathinda Division. He also approached vigilance Bureau, Punjab vide his application dated 24.09.2020 sent through e-mail regarding discrepancies in condemnation of computer hardware in the Bathinda Division. This case was thoroughly investigated by Sh. Anudeep Sharma, System Manager, Jalandhar Division who concluded that no such discrepancy was found in Bathinda Division. The competent authority ordered to direct the official not to make false and frivolous complaints against the Department vide letter no. Vlg-R/1-155/2021 dated 17.09.2021 through RL no. RP971712410IN which was received as undelivered. The communication sent vide letter dated 18.10.2021 through concerned Inspector Posts was returned by Sh. Yadwinder Singh on the plea that he is not having any post as mentioned in the said letter. It is pertinent to mention that Sh. Yadwinder Singh has made this complaint from his personal e-mail i.e. [email protected].
(iv) On 30.07.2020, Sh. Yadwinder Singh has addressed Sh. Bhupinder Yadav, Honorable MP & Chairman, Parliament Standing Committee, Personnel and Public Grievances Law and Justice regarding planting of sexual harassment case in order to pressurize the administration for his vested personal interest and to settle his personal issues.
(v) Sh. Yadwinder Singh has made repeated complaints on Twitter and CPGRAMS Portal regarding non delivery of his Passbooks whereas no amount was actually deposited by him. He has been misusing the slip issued to one Sh. Rajveer Singh who was known to him. Apart from this, Sh. Yadwinder Singh has been making false allegations against the officers of Punjab West Region. Inquiry into the complaint was conducted by ASP(Inv) Punjab West Region, who concluded that Sh. Yadwinder Singh had never attended Budhlada Post Office for getting his TD Account opened nor did he identify/ recognize official of Budhlada Post office to whom he had paid/handed over an amount of Rs.50,500/-. Hence Sh. Yadwinder Singh was found a blackmailer misusing the slip issued to one depositor. By his misdeeds, Sh. Yadwinder Singh is posing a threat to the staff of Budhlada Post office. He has been proceeded against under Rule-16 of CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965 by his Disciplinary Authority i.e. Supdt. Of Post offices Bathinda in this regard. SPOs Bathinda has also been directed to lodge complaint before Police Authorities for the criminal acts of blackmailing by Sh. Yadwinder Singh.
14
OA.No.170/60/1421/2021 CAT/Chandigarh Bench
(vi) He has also published an article related to official matter in Des Sevak Newspaper involving higher authorities of Circle office as well as Divisional Office.
(vii) In every article and news clipping name of Sh. Yadwinder Singh figures out which is violative of Rule-19 of CCS (Conduct) Rules, 1964.
(viii) Shri Yadwinder Singh while working as SPM Boha SO was proceeded against under Rule-14 of CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965 vide SPOs Bathinda memo number B-1/710 dated 28.09.2020 for remaining unauthorised absent from duty on 26.08.2020 and 27.08.2020 resulting in closure of Boha SO on 26.08.2020 which caused interruption and inconvenience to general public. He approached CAT Bench Chandigarh against the disciplinary case before exhausting all the department remedies available to him and indulged the Department in unnecessary litigation.
Transfer and Placement Committee was also informed that no single day passes when Sh. Yadwinder Singh has not submitted complaints to the Higher authorities, Police Authorities against the functioning of the staff/administration of Division office/ Head office/ Region office. The endless process of filing complaints is continuing till date and is stalling the functioning of all the offices besides torturing staff who are forced to attend Police Station time and again. Being posted in Bathinda Division and with his undue influence of local police he is targeting the staff by filing numerous false and frivolous complaints.
4.Transfer and Placement committee was also informed about the vacancy position in respect of Postal Assistant cadre in Gurdaspur and Hoshiarpur Divisions: -
Division Sanctioned Strength Working Strength Vacant Post Hoshiarpur 160 100 60 Gurdaspur 148 103 45
5.In view of above and after careful examination of all available record, the Committee recommends to invoke Rule 37 of Postal Manual Volume-IV and recommends transfer/posting of Sh. Yadwinder Singh Postal Assistant Bathinda Division as under: -
15
OA.No.170/60/1421/2021 CAT/Chandigarh Bench Sr. Name of the official Present Division to which Remarks No. Posting proposed to be transferred/posted
1. Sh.Yadwinder Singh Bathinda Hoshiarpur Dn. On Division administrative ground in the interest of service.
11. From the pleadings and written statements filed by the parties, it is apparent that the administration has come to the conclusion that it will be in the interest of the administration to transfer the applicant from his present Division to another Division under Rule 37 of the Postal Manual Volume-
IV.
12. Rule 37 of the Postal Manual Volume-IV is as under: -
Notwithstanding anything contained in these guidelines an official is liable to be transferred to any part of India unless it is expressly ordered otherwise for any particular class or classes of officials.
Provided that Postmen, Village Postman and MTS should not, except for very special reasons to be recorded in writing, be transferred from one district to another.
13. Under Rule 37 of the Postal Manual Volume-IV, the respondents have the power to transfer any official to any part of India and from one division to another division in the interest of administration. The applicant is a Postal Assistant and, therefore, does not fall under the category of Postman, Village Postman or MTS.
14. One of the contentions of the applicant is that by Rule 37 transfer, he shall suffer a loss of seniority after change of division. This cannot be countenanced, since a close examination of the rules indicates, that there is 16 OA.No.170/60/1421/2021 CAT/Chandigarh Bench no provision relating to any loss of seniority on account of transfer under Rule 37. In cases where a transfer is ordered under Rule 38, then there can be a possible loss in seniority. As provided under Rule 38, where an official is transferred at his own request but without arranging for mutual exchange, he shall rank junior in the gradation list of the new unit to all officials of that unit on the date on which the transfer order is issued, including also all persons who have been approved for appointment to that grade as on that date. However, there is no such provision under Rule 37 under which the applicant has been transferred. Hence there would be, apparently, no consequential loss in seniority, on account of transfer ordered under Rule
37.
15. There are a plethora of judgements in Supreme Court on the issue of judicial intervention in the matter of postings and transfer of employees.
16. In Mrs. Shilpi Bose and others vs. State of Bihar and others AIR 1991 SC 532, the Honourable Supreme Court has observed as follows:
"In our opinion, the courts should not interfere with a transfer order which are made in public interest and for administrative reasons unless the transfer orders are made in violation of any mandatory statutory rule or on the ground of mala fide. A Government servant holding a transferable post has no vested right to remain posted at one place or the other, he is liable to be transferred from one place to the other. Transfer orders issued by the competent authority do not violate any of his legal rights. Even if a transfer order is passed in violation of executive instructions or orders, the Courts ordinarily should not interfere with the order instead affected party should approach the higher authorities in the Department..................................."
17. In Union of India and others vs. S.L. Abbas AIR 1993 SC 2444, the Honourable Supreme Court has observed as follows: 17
OA.No.170/60/1421/2021 CAT/Chandigarh Bench "Who should be transferred where, is a matter for the appropriate authority to decide. Unless the order of transfer is vitiated by mala fides or is made in violation of any statutory provisions, the Court cannot interfere with it. While ordering the transfer, there is no doubt, the authority must keep in mind the guidelines issued by the Government on the subject. Similarly, if a person makes any representation with respect to his transfer, the appropriate authority must consider the same having regard to the exigencies of administration"
18. A similar view has been taken in National Hydroelectric Power Corporation Ltd. vs. Shri Bhagwan and another (2001) 8 SCC 574, wherein it has been held that no Government servant or employee of a public undertaking has any legal right to be posted forever at any one particular place since transfer of a particular employee appointed to the class or category of transferable posts from one place to another is not only an incident, but a condition of service, necessary too in public interest and efficiency in the public administration. Unless an order of transfer is shown to be an outcome of malafide exercise of power or stated to be in violation of statutory provisions prohibiting any such transfer, the courts or the tribunals cannot interfere with such orders, as though they were the appellate authorities substituting their own decision for that of the management.
19. From the records it is apparent that the applicant had been habitual of absenting himself from work. After submitting medical certificates from private medical practitioners repeatedly, he had reportedly refused to attend a medical board from whom a second medical opinion was sought by the respondents, to examine the veracity of his illness. Such a refusal, without any valid reason, does indicate that the applicant is not coming with clean hands and apparently has something to hide from the authorities regarding the veracity of his claim of being ill. Even after his transfer from Boha Sub- Post Office, Bathinda Division to Bhagta Bhai S.O Bathinda Division, he had not joined in his new post and again submitted a medical certificate of illness. Despite being asked by Supt. Post Offices, Bathinda Division from 18 OA.No.170/60/1421/2021 CAT/Chandigarh Bench time to time, he never presented himself to CMO Bathinda for second medical opinion as instructed.
20. From the facts mentioned above, as well as other aspects as noted by the Transfer and Placement Committee, his transfer from Bhatinda division to Hoshiarpur Division appears to be in the interest of administration. This transfer cannot be considered to be in lieu of any punishment which may be imposed upon him for any alleged misconduct. As stated by the respondents, separate charge sheets for his alleged misconduct stand already issued to the applicant and penalty, if any, may be imposed upon him, if he is found guilty, after following the due process under the Rules. Transfer to another postal division within the same State of Punjab, without any loss of seniority under Rule 37, certainly cannot be considered to be a punitive measure. The transfer order appears to be in order and in the interest of administration, keeping in view the facts and circumstances as available on record. The principles laid down made by the Honourable Apex Court in the case of Somesh Tiwari vs UOI (supra), against punitive transfers, are certainly not applicable in this case.
21. The applicant has alleged malafide against the respondent No: 2. However, the transfer of the applicant has been done after his case had been examined in detail by the Transfer and Placement Committee comprising of different senior officials, and so recommended by the committee. No case of any malafide on part of respondent No: 2 is borne out from the facts and sequence of events, as available from the pleadings available in the case. 19
OA.No.170/60/1421/2021 CAT/Chandigarh Bench
22. Keeping the above-mentioned points in view, the OA, being devoid of any merit, is liable to be dismissed.
23. Accordingly, the OA is dismissed.
24. However, there shall be no orders so as to costs.
(RAKESH KUMAR GUPTA) (SURESH KUMAR MONGA)
MEMBER (A) MEMBER (J)
/ps/