The Union of India and 3 Ors v. Ajeet Singh and Anr

ORDER

26.06.2023 (M. Zothankhuma, J) Mr. H. Gupta, learned counsel appears for the writ petitioners. None appears for the respondents.

¶2Affidavit dated 01.06.2023 has been filed by the petitioners, showing that notice by way Dasti Service has been affected upon respondent No. 1 on 18.05.2023 and upon respondent No. 2 on 19.05.2023. The writ petitioners have prayed for setting aside the order dated 14.03.2023 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Guwahati, by which the impugned transfer order of the respondent No. 1 has been stayed by the learned Tribunal.

¶3The respondent No. 1 has challenged the impugned transfer order dated 09.03.2023 on the ground that he has been frequently transferred to different places. His case is that on 17.01.2022, he was transferred to Maligaon and he joined Maligaon on 28.02.2022. He occupied the official bungalow and had also put his children to school. However, vide the impugned transfer order dated 09.03.2023, the respondent No. 1 had Page No.# 3/5 again been transferred from Maligaon to Rangiya. The learned Tribunal stayed the impugned transfer order in view of the fact that after the impugned transfer order had been issued on 09.03.2023, the respondent No. 1 had made a representation against the same on 10.03.2023. However, without disposing the representation submitted by the respondent No. 1, the respondent No. 1 had been released from his post, vide a release order issued through Whatsapp at 7:15 p.m on 13.03.2023. The respondent No. 2 was to join the post of the respondent No. 1 on

13.03.2023.

¶4The learned counsel for the writ petitioners submits that at the time of filing of the case before the learned Tribunal, the children of the respondent No. 1 were taking exams, which has now been completed. He also submits that the writ petitioners have taken a decision to allow the respondent No. 1 to continue to remain in his bungalow. He also submits that the transfer of the respondent No. 1 is within the same zone and the travelling time between Maligaon and Rangiya would be around an hour. He also submits that the release order that has been sent to the respondent No. 1 on 13.03.2023 was the same date when the respondent No. 1 had filed his case before the learned Tribunal. As such, the respondent No. 1 did not wait for the disposal of his representation prior to approaching the learned Tribunal.

¶5The learned counsel for the writ petitioners submits that in a similar matter, the learned Tribunal had dismissed a challenge made to a transfer order and the same has been upheld by the Division Bench of this Court, vide order dated 03.05.2023 passed in WP(C) No. 2309/2023 (Prem Page No.# 4/5 Prakash Pandey Vs. Union of India & 4 Others). He accordingly prays that the impugned order dated 14.03.2023 passed by the learned Tribunal in O.A No. 46/2023 (Annexure-1) should be set aside.

¶6We have perused the impugned order dated 14.03.2023 passed by the learned Tribunal in O.A No. 46/2023. In the said order, the writ petitioners have been directed to file their written statements within four weeks and rejoinder, if any, by the respondent No. 1 within two weeks thereafter. The matter was to be listed for completion of pleadings on

09.05.2023.

¶7On a query been raised by this Court as to the status of the O.A No. 46/2023 before the learned Tribunal, Mr. H. Gupta submits that written statement had been filed by the writ petitioners in the month of May, 2023. He also submits that the learned Tribunal had fixed the date of hearing of the O.A No. 46/2023 on 25.08.2023, which is a long way off.

¶8As the learned Tribunal is already seized of the matter, we are not inclined to decide the issue raised in this case. However, on considering the fact that the present case pertains to a challenge to a transfer order dated 09.03.2023 and the position of the respondent No. 1 is important, in view of the various developmental works being undertaken in the North East region, we are of the view that any delay in taking a decision in the case, can have an impact on the impending and current developmental works in the region, which would in turn affect the Public Exchequer. Accordingly, we are of the view that the fixing of the hearing date of the O.A No. 46/2023 by the learned Tribunal on 24.08.2023 should be preponed to an earlier date. Accordingly, we direct the learned Tribunal to Page No.# 5/5 take a decision on O.A No. 46/2023 expeditiously and preferably within a period of one (1) month from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this Order, after giving notice to the respondent No. 1.

¶9Writ petition is accordingly disposed of.

JUDGE JUDGE Comparing Assistant

PageoNo.#o1/5 GAHC010064362023 ooooooo ooooooooooooooo ooooooooooooooooTHEoGAUHATIoHIGHoCOURTo (HIGHoCOURToOFoASSAM,oNAGALAND,oMIZORAMoANDoARUNACHALoPRADESH)o CaseoNo.o:oWP(C)/2344/2023o THEoUNIONoOFoINDIAoANDo3oORSo REPRESENTEDoBYoTHEoSECRETARY,oRAILWAYoBOARD,oMINISTRYoOFo RAILWAYS,oGOVERNMENToOFoINDIA,oNEWoDELHI-110006 2:oTHEoGENERALoMANAGER oN.F.oRAILWAY oMALIGAON oGUWAHATI-781011 3:oTHEoGENERALoMANAGERo(CONSTRUCTION)oN.FoRAILWAY oMALIGAON oGUWAHATI-781011 4:oTHEoASSISTANToPERSONNELoOFFICER(GAZ) oN.F.oRAILWAY oMALIGAON oGUWAHATI-78101o VERSUSo AJEEToSINGHoANDoANR.o S/OoMR.oJAGJIWANoRAM,oP/R/OoQAURTERoNO.o477,oNAMBARIoOFFICERSo COLONY,oMALIGAON,oGUWAHATI-11 2:SRIoBOMoBOMoPANDEY oSRIoBOMoBOMoPANDEY oTOoBEoSERVEDoTHROUGHoTHEoASSISTANToPERSONNELoOFFICERo GAZETTEDoN.F.oRAILWAY oMALIGAON oGUWHATI 3:BOMoBOMoPANDEY o(TOoBEoSERVEDoTHROUGHoTHEoASSISTANToPERSONNELoOFFICER oGAZETTED Page No.# 2/5 N.F. RAILWAY MALIGAON GUWAHATI-1 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR H GUPTA Advocate for the Respondent : BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MICHAEL ZOTHANKHUMA HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE MALASRI NANDI