RUPESH HARI Vs. UNION OF INDIA & ORS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) C.M.No.26858/2016 (Exemption) Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions. Application stands disposed of. W.P.(C) 6549/2016 The petitioner joined the service as a Junior Engineer (Quality Assurance) in the year 2012. A complaint was lodged against him by a lady colleague on 15.04.2015 alleging that SMSs were sent by the petitioner to her on 02.04.2015, 04.04.2015 and 11.4.2015. A Memorandum dated 07.06.2015 was served on the petitioner. On 08.06.2015, the complaint was forwarded to the Complaint Committee. The petitioner submitted his response to the Complaint Committee. He also participated in the inquiry in which he claimed innocence. However, the grievance raised by the petitioner in this writ petition is that he has been transferred from New Delhi to Jabalpur. An O.A. filed by the petitioner, challenging the order of transfer, stands rejected by the Tribunal on 25.4.2016. A review filed also stands rejected on 23.05.2016 which has led to the filing of the present writ petition.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the order of the Tribunal is arbitrary and the Tribunal has failed to take into consideration the various grounds raised by the petitioner including the ground of acute hardship on account of the old age of his parents, the petitioner being the only son in Delhi to look after them.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the order is liable to be quashed as the transfer is in lieu of punishment. Counsel further submits that the Tribunal has failed to consider that the complaint made by the lady was motivated as she was keen to get herself transferred out of Delhi. Counsel also contends that the order of transfer and rejection of the representation of the petitioner dated 07.09.2015 is a mechanical order and has been passed without any application of mind. It is further contended that the petitioner is under a legal obligation to look after his old parents.