Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 3, Cited by 0]

Central Administrative Tribunal - Hyderabad

Vijay Bahadur Pathak vs M/O Railways on 28 October, 2021

                                                        OA/1008/2019




          CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
                 HYDERABAD BENCH

                          OA/020/1008/2019
         HYDERABAD, this the 28th day of October, 2021


Hon'ble Mr. Ashish Kalia, Judl. Member
Hon'ble Mr. B V Sudhakar, Admn. Member

Vijay Bahadur Pathak, S/o. Gaya Narayan Pathak,
Aged about 40 years, Occ: Loco Pilot,
O/o Chief Crew Controller,
South Central Railway,
Guntakal, Guntakal Division.
                                                  ...   Applicant.

(By Advocate : Mr. B Pavan Kumar)

                                    Vs.

1.   Union of India,
     Rep. by the General Manager,
     South Central Railway,
     Secunderabad.

2.   The Divisional Railway Manager,
     Personnel Branch,
     Guntakal.

3.   The Senior Divisional Personnel Officer,
     Personnel Branch,
     Guntakal.

                                                    ... Respondents

(By Advocate: Mr. M Venkateswarlu, SC for Railways)


                                 ---




                             Page 1 of 5
                                                            OA/1008/2019


                      ORAL ORDER

(As per Hon'ble Mr. Ashish Kalia, Judl. Member) Through Video Conferencing:

This Original Application has been filed under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 seeking the following reliefs:
"That this Hon'ble Tribunal may be pleased to call for the records pertaining to the list of Inter Railway Request Transfers of Loco Running Staff of Guntakal Division in Lr. No. SCR/P-GTL/222/LR.6/IRRT/ALP/Vol.V dt. 29.07.2019 and declare the same as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Article 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India in so far as not including the name of the applicant in the list and consequently declare that the applicant is entitled for inclusion of his name in the inter-zonal request transfer list and transfer for his choice place, in the interest of justice, and be pleased to pass such other order or orders as this Hon'ble Tribunal may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case."

2. The applicant is initially appointed as Assistant Loco-Pilot by the respondents on 08.06.2009 at Guntakal Division, South Central Railway. He was promoted to the post of Loco-Pilot on 09.02.2016 and posted at Guthi and again transferred to Guntakal in November, 2018. The Railway Board has revised its instructions of completing five years of service to one year to apply for Inter-Railway Zonal Transfer. To avail the same, the applicant has submitted an application on 19.10.2012 for transfer to Mughal Sarai Division, East Central Railway, Hazipur, Bihar. The respondents released a list of employees consisting of about 587 members who have applied for Inter-Railway Zonal Transfer in which the applicant's name is missing. Even though the applicant has applied for Inter-Railway Zonal Transfer on 19.10.2012, non-inclusion of his name in the said list resulted in denial of chance of his transfer. Being aggrieved of Page 2 of 5 OA/1008/2019 the action of the respondents, the applicant has approached this Tribunal.

3. Notices were issued. Learned counsel, Mr. M Venkateswarlu, Standing Counsel for the Railways, has filed reply. In reply, he has submitted that the Railway Administration is not denying any Inter Railway Request Transfer. The applications received through proper channel and fulfilling the conditions were forwarded to the Principal Chief Personnel Officer, Secunderabad and, from there to respective zones/divisions as per the procedure. The Inter Railway Request Transfer application of the applicant is not in receipt of this office as per the records of Senior Divisional Personnel Officer. He further submitted that the applicant has never contacted the administration regarding his Inter Railway Request Transfer. The applicant has not exhausted the remedy of submitting representation to the Railway Administration before approaching this Tribunal.

4. Heard the learned counsels for the parties at length.

5. This Tribunal has already decided the issue in OA No.834/2020 dt. 16.12.2020 in which this Tribunal had directed the respondents to relieve the applicants within a period of six months while considering the Inter-Railway Zonal Transfer. Operative portion of the said order is as under:

"....Keeping in view the interests of the organization and that of the applicants as well the deadline of May, 2021 fixed by Kota Division for the applicants to join, which works out to nearly six months, we direct the respondents Page 3 of 5 OA/1008/2019 to relieve the applicants by May, 2021 or earlier, if possible, depending on the staff strength and operational requirements. We make it clear that the NOC issued would remain operational till they are relieved by May, 2021."

This matter has been subjected to the judgment of the Hon'ble High Court of Telangana in WP No. 11551/2019 & Ors. dt. 20.04.2021 in which the following directions were issued:

"The Tribunal has already granted six months from the date of the impugned orders.
However, having regard to the facts and circumstances, and the submissions of the learned counsel, we deem it appropriate to grant some reasonable time. For the foregoing reasons, the writ petitions are dismissed, and the petitioners are granted six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order for taking steps for relieving the respondents / employees to the transferred places.
Interlocutory applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. No order as to costs."

6. In a similar matter, the Hon'ble High Court of AP/ Telangana in WP No. 31544 of 2016 dt. 31.10.2017 held that:

"...11. It is interesting to note that the requests of the respondents for Zonal transfers were accepted way back in the year 2012 and 2013. Now a period of 4 to 5 years has passed. As and when the respondents go and join in the respective Zones, they have to take the bottom most seniority. Therefore, any further delay on the part of the Administration, will only weaken the morale of the persons, as it may dampen the prospects of their further promotions.
12. It is not the case of the Administration that no recruitment ever took place after 2012-13 up to this date. Their only case is that adequate number of persons could not be selected.
13. Therefore, in such circumstances, the blame, if at all there is any, may perhaps lie on the part of the Railway Recruitment Board and not upon the individual employees. Therefore, the Writ Petitions are dismissed. However, the Page 4 of 5 OA/1008/2019 Administration is given time up to 28th February, 2018 to relieve the respondents to enable them to join in their transferred places. To facilitate these applicants, the Railway Recruitment Board is directed to complete the process of recruitment by 31st January, 2018. The miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in these writ petitions shall stand closed. No costs."

7. The only difficulty in the present case is that the Inter Railway Request Transfer application of the applicant has not been forwarded by the concerned Railway Division i.e. Guntakal Division. We are of this view that once an application for transfer is submitted, there will be legitimate expectation from the side of the applicant for his transfer. His application for transfer should have been processed.

8. In the facts and circumstances of the case, we are of this view that the applicant shall furnish a copy of his Inter Railway Request Transfer application with proof to the respondents. The respondents shall process such application and it should be considered by the General Manager of the concerned Railway Division within a period of two months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. In case, the applicant's case is considered, he should be relieved within a period of six months. It is ordered accordingly.

9. With the above observation, the OA is disposed of without any order as to costs.

   (B.V. SUDHAKAR)                              (ASHISH KALIA)
ADMINISTRATIVE MEMBER                         JUDICIAL MEMBER


/Ram./




                                Page 5 of 5