Central Administrative Tribunal - Delhi
Sh. Ram Kishore vs Union Of India & Ors on 12 June, 2009
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH (Vacation Bench) OA NO.1637/2009 New Delhi, this the 12th day of June, 2009 HONBLE SHRI SHAILENDRA PANDEY, MEMBER (A) Shri Jai Kishan S/o Sh. Jai Lal Yadav R/o House No.736 V&PO-Kapashera New Delhi 37. Sh. Ram Kishore S/o Sh. Harden Singh House No.495 Mitraon Delhi. Applicants (By Advocate: Sh. M.K.Bhardwaj) Versus Union of India & Ors. The Home Secretary Ministry of Home Affairs North Block New Delhi 110 001. Sh. O.P.S.Malik Director General Narcotics Control Bureau West Block-1 Wing No.5 R.K.Puram New Delhi 110 066. Dr. Ish Kumar Dy. Director General (Coordination) Narcotics Control Bureau West Block-1 Wing No.5 R.K.Puram New Delhi 110 066. Respondents ORDER (Oral) By Shailendra Pandey, Member (A):
Counsel for the applicants states that this is the first time transfers have been resorted to in the Narcotics Control Bureau (NCB) and that the children of both the applicants are studying in schools in Delhi and transfer at this juncture will cause considerable financial and other hardships to them. He also states that there are many persons who have completed longer years of service than the applicants and if there was any administrative need for additional drivers at Guwahati and Indore, then the persons, who have longer years of service should have been transferred first. It is also stated that both the applicants have good service records and there have been no complaints against them till now. It is also his contention that these transfers have been undertaken merely to accommodate two Drivers (who are working in the SSB and BSF respectively), to be posted under the concerned officers in the NCB.
2. In response to a query from the Bench, the applicants counsel admitted that the Drivers in NCB are liable to serve anywhere in India where officers of the NCB exist.
3. Although it is an accepted principle that transfer is an incident of public service, and that the executive authorities are the best judge of when and who should be transferred, it is also desirable that keeping in view the enormous financial and other difficulties caused to Group C & D Government servants as a result of sudden transfers a clear policy with regard to transfers be in place. Counsel for the applicants states that as of now there is no such policy governing transfers in the NCB. It is also noted that the transfer orders of the applicants are not stated to have been issued on administrative grounds.
4. In this view of the matter, we think it would be appropriate to direct Respondent No.1 to treat this OA as a representation of the applicants and take a decision thereon by issuing a speaking order within a period of three weeks of the receipt of this order. Till such time the representations of the applicants are so disposed of, the status quo, as of today, may be maintained. The OA is disposed of accordingly. No costs.
Issue Dasti.
(Shailendra Pandey) Member (A) /nsnrsp/