SUKHBIR SINGH Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) AS the reliefs claimed in all the OAs are similar, so all the cases are decided by a common judgment taking OA No. 1413 of 2012 as the leading case. The applicant in OA No. 1414 of 2012 has challenged the order dated 08.05.2012 by which he has been transferred under CML (i.e. Command Manning Level) category from the office of G.E., (CT) Dehradun to the office of GE Lansdowne as well as the order dated 01.10.2012 passed by the respondents rejecting the representation of the applicant against his said transfer under CML category. The applicant in OA No. 1415 of 2012 has challenged the order dated 08.05.2012 by which he has been transferred under CML (i.e. Command Manning Level) category from the office of G.E., Dehradun to the office of GE Gwalior as well as the order dated 01.10.2012 passed by the respondents rejecting the representation of the applicant against his said transfer under CML category. The applicant in OA No. 1416 of 2012 has challenged the order dated 08.05.2012 by which he has been transferred under CML (i.e. Command Manning Level) category from the office of G.E., Premnagar Dehradun to the office of GE (West) Bareilly as well as the order dated 01.10.2012 passed by the respondents rejecting the representation of the applicant against his said transfer under CML category. The applicant in OA No. 1417 of 2012 has challenged the order dated 08.05.2012 by which he has been transferred under CML (i.e. Command Manning Level) category from the office of G.E., Dehradun to the office of GE (Project) Bareilly as well as the order dated 01.10.2012 passed by the respondents rejecting the representation of the applicant against his said transfer under CML category.

(2.) IN this OA filed under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, the applicant has challenged the order dated 08.05.2012 by which he has been transferred under CML (i.e. Command Manning Level) category from the office of GE, Dehradun to the office of CWE, Ranchi as well as the order dated 01.10.2012 passed by the respondents rejecting the representation of the applicant against his said transfer under CML category. It may also be noted that this is the second round of litigation by the applicant against the said transfer order. Previously, the applicant had filed OA No. 848 of 2012 wherein vide order dated 28.06.2012, the applicant was directed to make a comprehensive representation against the transfer order dated 08.05.2012 and the respondents were directed to decide the representation preferably within 15 days. It had also been directed that the order of transfer qua the applicant shall not be given effect to till the respondents take decision on the representation of the applicant. Pursuant to the said order the applicant made his representation dated 07.07.2012 which has been rejected by the respondents by order dated 01.10.2012. The said rejection order is also under challenge in this OA.

(3.) IN short, the case set up by the applicant is that he was appointed as a Superintendent E & M which post has been re -designated as Junior Engineer. The applicant joined the office of GE, Dehradun on 25.08.2009. The date of station seniority of the applicant has been reckoned from 25.08.2009. Thus, as per Rule 36(b) of the CML posting guidelines dated 27.08.2007, he would be liable for such transfer only on completion of 6 years from 25.08.2009. The applicant has given examples of other officers who have been transferred under CML posting after completion of 6 years tenure. He has given the examples of Shyam Bihari, JE and Pankaj Mittal, JE in this regard. However, the impugned transfer order dated 08.05.2012 in respect of the applicant has been issued before the completion of 6 years tenure. Secondly, the applicant has argued that the impugned transfer order in respect of him is also against Clause 35 of CML posting as CWE, Ranchi comes under the control of Central Command, Lucknow which is barred by Clause 35 of the CML posting. Thus, the respondents cannot transfer the applicant within the same command under CML posting. Thirdly, the applicant has contended that the impugned transfer in respect of the applicant under CML posting is from an Executive to a Non -Executive post which is barred under Clause 36(b) of CML posting. Fourthly, it has also been contended that the impugned transfer is against the letter and spirit of Clause 36(c) of CML posting which provides that travel time to the transferred place preferably should not be more than overnight journey. But the applicant has been transferred from Dehradun to Ranchi which is more than 1500 kms. apart and cannot be travelled in an overnight journey. Thus, in a nut shell, the applicant has contended that the impugned transfer order in respect of him is in violation of various provisions of CML posting policy/guidelines/instructions, which finds support in the order passed by the coordinate Bench of Chandigarh in OA No. 13/PB/2012 along with connected OA No. 14/PB/2012 dated 7.9.2012.