K.S. SRIDHARA NAIK Vs. UNION OF INDIA, THE SENIOR DIVISIONAL PERSONNEL OFFICER, THE DIVISIONAL ENGINEER SOUTH WESTERN RAILWAY AND THE DIVISIONAL RAILWAY MANAGER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner, assailing the correctness of the order of dismissal, dated 03.07.2013 passed in Original Application No. 94/2013 on the file of Central Administrative Tribunal, Bangalore Bench, Bangalore, has presented this petition. The only grievance of the petitioner at the out set is that, he had submitted a detailed representation to the respondents stating that due to his ill health and family problems he is not in a position to do the technical work in the Railway Department. Instead of considering his request, the jurisdictional competent authority has rejected the same. Therefore he was constrained to redress his grievance by filing the Original Application No. 94/2013 on the file of Central Administrative Tribunal, Bangalore Bench, Bangalore. The Tribunal after considering the relevant material on file and the grounds urged in the application has dismissed the Original Application No. 94/2013 with costs of Rs. 5,000/ -. Being dissatisfied with the order of Central Administrative Tribunal, the petitioner has preferred this writ petition.

(2.) WE have heard Sri M. Raghavendra, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and perused the impugned order passed by Central Administrative Tribunal. After careful perusal of the impugned order passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, it is manifest on the face of the order that, there is no error or irregularity as such committed by the Central Administrative Tribunal. It is significant to note that, the petitioner was working as a Senior Clerk under the Engineering Department and now he has been transferred to Penugonda at Andhra Pradesh. Due to his ill health and family problems, the petitioner has given representation specifically contending that, when only three years of his service is left he cannot be transferred. After perusal of the entire material available on record, it can be seen that the competent authority has rightly considered his representation specifically having regard to the fact that he is technical expertise and his services are required in the Engineering Control office due to administrative reasons. The reasoning given by the competent authority is well founded. The Tribunal in turn also is justified in accepting the reasoning given by the competent authority for transferring the petitioner having regard to the technical knowledge the petitioner has possessed. Hence, it is not a fit case to consider the grievances of the petitioner. Therefore, we do not find any good ground to consider the relief sought in the writ petition. Hence, writ petition is dismissed as devoid of merits. Ordered accordingly.