AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Per : Hon’ble Shri Jayesh V. Bhairavia, Member (Judicial)
Advocate Mr. Joy Mathew for the applicant present in Court room and Advocate Mr. H.D Shukla for the respondents present through video conference.
The applicant while working as Postal Assistant had submitted application for transfer to Delhi Division sion in terms of policy in vogue and the said transfer request was accepted by both the Mehsana Division (Gujarat Circle) and DCC Saket PO, Delhi Division. However, the applicant was not relieved by the respondents mainly on the ground that disciplinary proceeding and judicial proceeding is pending against the applicant. Being aggrieved, the applicant has filed the present OA.
Learned counsel for the applicant vehemently argued as under:
That the solely based on the CFSL hand writing expert opinion, the respondents had issued charge memorandum for initiation of departmental inquiry against the applicant. Being aggrieved with it, the applicant had challenged the legality of the said charge memorandum before the Principal Bench of this Tribunal by way of filing O.A. No.20/2023 and this Tribunal vide order dated 20.05.2025 allowed the said OA by setting aside the impugned charge memorandum.
Thereafter, the original respondents being aggrieved with the order dated 20.05.2025, approached the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi by way of WP No. 17328/2024 wherein the Hon’ble High Court by upholding the order passed by Principal Bench of this Tribunal, dismissed the said WP vide order/judgment dated 17.12.2024.
After dismissal of the said SCA, the applicant submitted a representation before the Competent Authority requesting that he may the relived to join at the transferred place. The respondents have not challenged the said order/judgment dated 17.12.2024 before any higher forum. Therefore, it is evident that there is neither judicial nor any disciplinary proceeding is pending against the applicant.
In view of the aforesaid, learned counsel for the applicant vehemently argued that for no reason whatsoever, the respondents have withheld the implementation of the own request transfer order of the applicant and as on date the applicant is not relieved.
On receipt of the notice issued by this Tribunal vide order dated 16.02.2026, Advocate Mr. H.D. Shukla appeared for the respondents and mainly argued as under:-
That no continuing enforceable right arises merely from approval of transfer because actual relief remains subject to the governing conditions and competent administrative decision
Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record.
It can be seen that the Principal Bench of this Tribunal vide order dated 20.05.2024 in O.A. No. 20/2023 had quashed and set aside the charge memorandum issued to the applicant and the said order as such attained finality on dismissal of WP No. 17328/2024 by the Hon’ble High Court vide order dated 17.12.2024.
Thus, we find substantial force in the submission of counsel for the applicant that neither any disciplinary proceeding nor any judicial proceeding is pending against the applicant and the respondents, may not withheld or delay the implementation of the transfer order which was issued in favour of the applicant and as such the applicant may be relieved.
Thus, we deem it appropriate to dispose of this OA, with direction upon the respondents to relieve the applicant in terms of the transfer order dated 17.10.2022 (Annexure A/7) within four weeks from the date of receipt of the certified copy of this order. Pending MAs, if any, shall also stands disposed of. No order as to costs.