Central Administrative Tribunal - Chandigarh
Bimla Kumari vs Navodya Vidyalaya Samiti on 4 September, 2025
1 (OA No.060/220/2019)
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
CHANDIGARH BENCH
CIRCUIT SITTING AT SHIMLA
O.A. No.060/220/2019
Reserved on: 04.09.2025
Pronounced on: 18.09.2025
HON'BLE MR. RAMESH SINGH THAKUR, MEMBER (J)
HON'BLE MRS. ANJALI BHAWRA, MEMBER (A)
Bimla Kumari, D/o Late Sh. R.D. Singh, age 58 years, PGT
(Economics) JNV, Gangar Kot, Suyalbari, Nainital (U.K.) 263135
(Group B) permanent resident of H.No.436, Vayu Vihar, Post Office
Harjinder Nagar, Kanpur, U.P.-263 135.
...Applicant
(BY ADVOCATE: Mr. ARVIND GALAV)
VERSUS
1. Union of India through its Secretary, Ministry of Human
Resources Development (Department of School Education and
Literacy), New Delhi-110 001.
2. Navodaya Vidyalaya Samiti (An Autonomous Organization under
Ministry of Human Resource Development (Department of School
Education & Literacy) Govt. of India B-15, Institutional Area,
Sector 62, G.B. Nagar, Noida (UP) through its Commissioner -
201309.
3. Assistant Commissioner (E-3), Navodaya Vidyalaya Samiti,
Ministry of Human Resource Development (Dept. of School
Education and Literacy) Govt. of India, B-15, Institutional Area,
Sector 62, G.B. Nagar, Noida (UP) 201309.
4. Deputy Commissioner, Navodaya Vidyalaya Samiti, Regional
Office, Bay No.26-27, Sector 31A, Chandigarh-160030.
...Respondents
(BY ADVOCATE: Mr. SANJAY GOYAL, SR. CGSC WITH MR. PANKAJ
KHURANA)
2 (OA No.060/220/2019)
ORDER
Per: HON'BLE MRS. ANJALI BHAWRA, MEMBER (A):
1. This O.A has been filed under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 seeking the following reliefs:
"i The records of the case may kindly be called for perusal of the Hon'ble Tribunal.
ii. This Hon'ble Tribunal may quash the impugned order dated F.No.3- (1)/2017-NVS(E3) 3198 dated 07.06.2018 (Annexure A/1) along with the orders dated 28.06.2017/06.07.2017 and the order No.12-
14/NVS-CH(RO)/Estt.(T)/3642-44, dated 26.08.2015 (Annexure A/1/A & A/10 (respectively) whereby the just and legitimate claim of the applicant for regularizing the period from 05.02.2015 to 08.05.2015 treating the same as on duty being compulsory waiting period with all consequential benefits has been illegally and arbitrarily rejected by passing a totally vague, non speaking, cryptic and perverse order. iii. Further the respondents be directed to treat the period from 05.02.2015 to 08.05.2015 as compulsory waiting period and regularize the same and treat the said period as on duty for all intents and purposes and grant all consequential benefits i.e. arrears of salary etc. along with interest @ 12% per annum."
2. The brief facts of the case as submitted by the applicant are as follows:
I. Being aggrieved by the transfer order dated 14.08.2014 from JNV Phaphre Bhai Ke, Distt Mansa despite the application of the applicant for transfer from Chandigarh region to Lucknow region was pending, the applicant filed OA No.060/00714/2014 before this Tribunal, which was disposed of on 07.11.2014 with a direction to the respondents to decide the pending representation of the applicant by passing a reasoned and speaking order and till then the interim order dated 22.08.2014 was ordered to be continued. Thereafter, the competent authority has passed an order dated 29.01.2015 (Annexure A/3) whereby the earlier transfer from JNV Kunihar District Solan HP to JNV Phaphre Bhai Ke, District Mansa, Punjab vide order dated 14.08.2014 (Annexure A/2) was kept intact and as such the 3 (OA No.060/220/2019) undertaking and the direction of this Tribunal was not complied with on the alleged ground that the request transfers have not been materialized and the case of the applicant would be considered in due course on merit basis.
II. The order dated 29.01.2015 was passed despite the fact that the applications submitted by the applicant for transfer was already pending before the authorities and even a representation of March, 2014, she had applied for out of region transfer and mentioned the choice station as Ruddrapur, U.S. Nagar/Lucknow. Thereafter in the another representation dated 05.05.2014 she added two more stations i.e. Nainital and Champawat which also falls under Lucknow region and the post of PGT (Economics) was vacant there. The deliberate and disobedience of the order and the direction contained in the order dated 07.11.2014, the applicant filed CP No.060/0031/2015 in OA No.060/00714/2014 in which notice was issued on 26.02.2015. The applicant also filed OA No.063/00011/2015 challenging the order dated 29.01.2015 in which notice was also issued on 10.02.2015 (Annexure A/4).
III. It is submitted by the applicant in the OA that the applicant submitted a representation on 11.02.2015 (Annexure A/5) followed another representation dated 16.02.2015 (Annexure A/6) requesting the respondents to keep the transfer orders dated 14.08.2014 and 29.01.2015 in abeyance during the pendency of the OA filed by the applicant. On 26.02.2015 (Annexure A/7), in view of the passing of the order, the stay order given by this Tribunal on 22.08.2014 was no more operational and as such the prayer became infructuous. On 31.03.2015, this Tribunal while adjourning the case for 06.04.2015 directed the respondents not to fill up the post of PGT (Economics). The Contempt Petition filed by the applicant was not pressed at that stage and the same was got disposed 4 (OA No.060/220/2019) of and the notices were discharged on 11.03.2015 as the order dated 29.01.2015 was already under challenge in the said OA. On 29.04.2015 (Annexure A/8), in compliance of the directions, the respondents passed the transfer orders transferring the applicant from JNV Solan (under transfer to JNV Mansa) to JNV Nainital and thus the direction of this Tribunal stood complied with. Thereafter, the applicant submitted her joining report at JNV Gangarkot, Suyalbari, District Nainital on 09.05.2015. IV. Further, it is submitted by the applicant that the applicant submitted a representation on 12.05.2015 (Annexure A/9) for treating the intervening period i.e. 05.02.2015 to 08.05.2015 as compulsory waiting period and as on duty for all intents and purposes. In response to the said representations, the respondents passed an order dated 26.08.2015 (Annexure A/10) regularizing the intervening period from 05.02.2015 to 08.05.2015 by granting leave to the kind due. Being aggrieved the applicant submitted a representation on 10.02.2016 (Annexure A/11) to treat the intervening period from 05.02.2015 to 08.05.2015 as compulsory waiting period band further submitted that the order is vague, non speaking and cryptic. Finding no response from the respondents, the applicant again submitted a representation on 21.07.2016 (Annexure A/12) and another representation dated 27.02.2017 (Annexure A/13) respectively. V. Upon consideration, the NVS passed an order dated 06.07.2017 conveying that the earlier decision dated 26.08.2015 is as per rules. It would be seen that still the order as conveyed to the applicant is neither reasoned nor speaking one nor the pleas raised in the representation find any consideration and as such the order suffers from non application of mind and perversity. Once again being aggrieved by the vague and non speaking order, the applicant submitted a representation on 28.06.2017/07.06.2017 followed by another representation dated 25.10.2017 in response to which 5 (OA No.060/220/2019) the NVS passed an order dated 07.06.2018 (Annexure A/1) and informed that the matter has been reconsidered and there is no change in the decision of the competent authority.
VI. It has been submitted in the OA that despite repeated requests and representations, the respondents have not passed any well reasoned and speaking order. The orders dated 26.08.2015 and 06.07.2017 stood merged in the order dated 07.06.2018 (Annexure A/1), the applicant has exhausted all the remedies available to him by making repeated representations but the respondents are bent upon not to pass reasoned and speaking order which they are legally bound to do and under these circumstances the applicant has no meaningful choice and option except to file the present OA.
3. Notice was issued to the respondents. The respondents filed written statement on behalf of respondents no.1 to 4 on 05.09.2019 wherein it is submitted as follows:
I. It is submitted by the respondents that the applicant is seeking quashing of order dated 07.06.2018 (A-1) along with orders dated 28.06.2017/06.07.2017 and the order dated 26.08.2015 whereby the claim of the applicant for regularizing the period from 05.02.2015 to 08.05.2015 treating the same as on duty being compulsory waiting period has been rejected. The applicant while working as PGT(Eco) at JNV Solan was transferred on administrative grounds to JNV Mansa vide order dated 14.08.2014 in pursuance to NVS Headquarters order dated 01.08.2014. She was relieved by the Principal from JNV Solan to join her duties at JNV Mansa.
In the meantime the applicant approached this Tribunal by filing OA No.060/0714/2014 in which interim orders were passed on 22.08.2014 staying the operation of transfer order. The applicant was allowed to join her duties at JNV Solan. The said OA was disposed of by this Tribunal vide order dated 07.11.2014 with the direction to respondents to 6 (OA No.060/220/2019) decide the pending representations of the applicant by passing a reasoned/speaking order and till such decision, interim order dated 22.08.2014 was ordered to continue. The case was forwarded to NVS HQs for taking decision on her representation.
II. It is averred by the respondents that the representation of the applicant was considered by the Commissioner and rejected vide order dated 29.01.2015. After receipt of order, the applicant approached this Tribunal by filing C.P. No.060/00031/2015 titled Bimla Kumari Versus G.S. Bothyal, which was later on disposed of. Vide order dated 29.04.2015, the applicant was transferred to JNV Nainital in compliance to the direction of this Tribunal in OA No.063/00011/2015. The applicant submitted a representation for treating the Intervening period l.e. 05.02.2015 to 08.05.2015 as on duty for all intends and purposes. Vide letter dated 26.8.2015, the intervening period from 05.02.2015 to 08.05.2015 was regularized by NVS (RO) Chandigarh by granting leave of kind due. On representation by the applicant, NVS HQs also uphold the order of NVS RO Chandigarh. Therefore, the respondents prayed that the present OA lacks substance and is thus liable to be dismissed.
4. In the rejoinder, the applicant reiterated the facts as per OA and also pressed upon the point that the claim of the applicant for treating the intervening period from 05.02.2015 to 08.05.2015 as on duty for all intents and purpose being compulsory waiting period is just, genuine, proper and legitimate, and thus, deserves to be accepted and the respondents have wrongly rejected the said claim of the applicant arbitrarily and on unsustainable grounds.
5. Heard both the counsels and have read the averments made in the present OA.
7 (OA No.060/220/2019)
6. In view of the facts of the case, it is clear that the interim protection given by the Tribunal in the earlier OA to the applicant was no more operational after 29.01.2015 when the respondents had passed a speaking order in compliance with the directions of the Tribunal. She further had submitted representation and till she has not got the posting at a desired place, she had chosen to absent herself from the new place of posting by not joining at the given place. There was no direction or protection of the Tribunal during that time in favour of the applicant. Further, when she had joined at a new place of posting as per her option and she moved the case for regularization of the period w.e.f. 05.02.2015 to 08.02.2015, the Tribunal is of the view that the respondents have rightly considered it as leave of kind due and have regularized the said period as per rules and regulations. It is clear that this willful absence on the part of the applicant cannot be treated as compulsory waiting when the respondents had already made posting at JNV Mansa. Thus, the OA filed by the applicant to treat this period as 'compulsory waiting' is devoid of any merits.
7. In view of the above, we find no reason to interfere in the orders passed by the respondents qua the applicant.
8. In view of the aforesaid, the OA is found to be devoid of any merits and hence the same is hereby dismissed. No order as to costs.
(ANJALI BHAWRA) (RAMESH SINGH THAKUR)
Member (A) Member (J)
/sv/