RAJARAMAN E Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Appellant is the Petitioner in W.P(C) No. 24158 of 2010. The writ petition was filed challenging Ext.P1 order transferring the Petitioner, the Judicial Member of the Railway Claims Tribunal, Ernakulam, to the Railway Claims Tribunal, Bhuvaneswar. By judgment delivered on 3.8.2010 the learned single Judge dismissed the writ petition. The brief facts of the case are as follows.

(2.) The Appellant, a practicing advocate at Chennai was appointed as Member (Judicial) in the Bangalore Bench of the Railway Claims Tribunal by Ext.P2 order dated 29.11.2006. The appointment was for a period of five years from the date of joining the Railway Claims Tribunal or till the attainment of 68 years of age, whichever is earlier. The Appellant assumed office as Member (Judicial) in the Bangalore Bench of the Railway Claims tribunal on 29.11.2006.Shortly thereafter he was transferred to Guwahati Bench of the Railway claims Tribunal and was relieved from Bangalore Bench on 5.4.2007. He assumed office at Guwahati on 23.4.2007. He thereafter represented against his transfer. Acting on the said representation he was transferred and posted as Member (Judicial) Railway Claims Tribunal, Ernakulam, where he assumed office in July, 2007. While the Appellant was functioning as Member (Judicial) Railway Claims Tribunal, Ernakulam, the Chairman of the Railway Claims Tribunal transferred and posted him as Member (Judicial) in the Railway Claims Tribunal at Bhuvaneswar by Ext.P1 order dated 25.5.2010. Aggrieved by Ext.P1 order of transfer the Appellant filed O.A. No. 451 of 2010 in the Central Administrative Tribunal, Ernakulam Bench. By Annexure A order passed on 20.7.2010 the Central Administrative Tribunal dismissed the application. Incidentally the Central Administrative Tribunal also held, overruling the contention of the Respondents, that it has jurisdiction to entertain the application challenging the Appellant's transfer to Bhuvaneswar.

(3.) Aggrieved by the order passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal dismissing O.A. No. 451 of 2010 the Appellant filed W.P(C) No. 22859 of 2010 in this Court. When the writ petition came up for hearing before a Division Bench of this Court, this Court passed Annexure B order dated 30.7.2010 to the effect that the pendency of the writ petition will not stand in the way of the Appellant seeking relief from other jurisdictions, if he is entitled to the same. The Division Bench expressed a doubt as to the competence of the Central Administrative Tribunal to entertain the dispute. Later, the Division Bench heard W.P(C) No. 22589 of 2010 and on 2.8.2010 reserved judgment in the matter. The Division Bench also passed Annexure C order to the effect that it will be open to the Appellant to seek other remedies as stated in the earlier order dated 30-7-2010. The instant writ appeal was thereupon filed challenging Ext.P1 order. It was contended that the transfer is not in the exigencies of service and that it is a colourable exercise of power. The Appellant contended that the posts of Member (Judicial) and Member (Technical) at Bhuvaneswar have been lying vacant for the past several months and that by Ext.P3 order dated 26.2.2010 he was authorized to discharge the functions of Member (Judicial) at Bhuvaneswar for ten working days every month, that as per the said order he has been discharging the functions of Member (Judicial) in the Railway Claims Tribunal, Bhuvaneswar Bench for ten days a month and that if he is transferred from Ernakulam to Bhuvaneswar, the Ernakulam Bench will be left without a Judicial Member. The learned single Judge repelled his contentions and held that the Chairman of the Railway Claims Tribunal is competent to transfer the Appellant. The writ petition was accordingly dismissed. Hence this writ appeal.