Tribunals and CommissionsSingle Bench(2026) 09 CAT CK 3875

Lince Thomas vs Principal Chief Personnel Officer & Ors.

Central Administrative Tribunal, Ernakulam · Decided on 7 September 2026

HON’BLE JUDGES
Sunil Thomas, Judicial Member
CASE NUMBER
Original Application No.180/00650/2020

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

27 paragraphs · 1,153 words

The applicant while working as Technician-Mech Grade I Diesel Loco Shed, Ernakulam was transferred to DSL-Shed/ERS Ernakulam by Annexure A1 order. This was challenged by the applicant in the Original Application. An interim order of status quo was ordered to be maintained. Thereafter Annexure A5 Office Order was issued by which, for a better administrative control and utilization technical expertise of Diesel Shed Staff, the competent authority has accorded approval for transfer of staff working in Diesel Hydraulic 140 T breakdown cranes at Diesel sheds to respective C&W depot under the control of Sr. DME's of concerned divisions. Pending the O.A, the applicant was promoted by Annexure A8 order dated 02.07.2021 as Mechanical/ Senior Technician (Mechanical). It was specifically stated that the promotion order will take effect only from the date of shouldering higher responsibilities in the promoted grade.

2.

Challenging Annexures A1 and A5, the applicant has approached this Tribunal. The reliefs sought are as follow:

“...1. To call for the records leading to the issuance of Central Administrative TribunalAnnexure A5 Order so as far as it grants approval for transferring the technicians-Gr I from the post of Tech- Gr I/ Mech (DSL/ Mechanic) Diesel Loco Shed, Ernakulam South to C and W Marshalling yard, Ernakulam for maintenance of 140 TBD Crane and SPART and to set aside the same.

2.

To call for the records leading to the issuance of Annexure A1 order so far as it relates transferring the applicant from the post of Tech – Gr.I (DSL/Mech) in the Diesel Loco Shed, Ernakulam South to Ernakulam under TVC Division as 140 TBD Crane and SPART and to set aside the same...”

3.

The crux of the contention of the learned Counsel for the applicant is that the transfer of the applicant from the post of Technician – Gr. I (DSL/Mech) (Disel Loco Shed, Ernakulam South) to C&W, Marshalling Yard, Ernakulam for maintenance of 140 TBD Crane and SPART is bad for various reasons. Advancing the challenge, the learned Counsel for the applicant contended that Annexure A5 order in so far as it accorded approval to transfer the applicant from Loco Diesel Shed to C&W Wing, Mechanical Department was without considering the relevant factors, arbitrary and thus violative of Article 14. It was further contended that the Annexures A1 and A5 will adversely affect the promotional avenues of the applicant. It was also contended that the applicant was not sufficiently trained to operate the Diesel Hydraulic 140 TBD Crane.

4.

In the reply statement filed by the respondents as well as additional reply statement subsequent to the amendment, this contention of the applicant was dealt with in detail. It was stated in the additional reply statement that the applicant is under misapprehension that they are two separate departments and the work was entirely different. It was contended by the learned Standing Counsel for the Railways that SPART was constituted for the specific work of attending work of urgent nature that arises in exceptional cases. The same work as done by the applicant in the Diesel Shed is also done in the case of SPART. The only distinction being that it has been brought under two administrative controls and the work to be done by the applicant remained the same. The grade also remain the same. The only difference being that the applicant has to move for work arrangement from the Diesel Shed to SPART where exclusive work of similar nature is being done.

5.

A reference to Annexure A5 only indicates that permission has been accorded only for the transfer of staff working in Diesel Hydraulic 140 T breakdown cranes at Diesel sheds to respective C&W depot under the control of Sr. DME's of concerned divisions. It is an administrative order issued by the Railways as a work arrangement. Such a work arrangement is within the domain of respondent and hence not susceptible to challenge at the instance of the applicant.

6.

It is also pertinent to note that the applicant has been specifically trained along with others, for SPART training at DTTC/GOC evidenced by Annexure R2 dated 26.02.2016. After having undergone SPART training, the applicant has received the financial benefits also. He cannot now challenge the order by which he has been transferred to the Diesel Shed/ERS.

7.

Though a vague contention was raised by the applicant that his seniority has been lost, that does not appear to be correct. The applicant contended that his juniors were given promotion and only thereafter, by Annexure A8, the applicant was promoted as Senior Technician (Mechanical) with a rider that promotion order will take effect only from the date of shouldering higher responsibilities in the promoted grade. It is pertinent to note that Annexure R4 Seniority List clearly shows that the applicant is placed at Sl. No. 15 above R.Saji and Shyamkumar C.S. at Sl. No. 16 and 17 who are his juniors but were promoted earlier. The seniority remains intact. In fact he has not challenged Annexure R4 nor filed objection to it.

8.

Having considered this, I am inclined to hold that challenge to Annexures A1 and A5 is misconceived. The learned Standing Counsel for the Railways also pointed out that in an identical situation challenge to similar order by another applicant in O.A No. 631/2020 was declined by this Tribunal.

9.

Having considered the above, the O.A fails and is accordingly dismissed. No costs.

List of Annexures

Annexure A1- True copy of the Order dated 4.12.2020 issued by the 3rd respondent.

Annexure A2- True copy of the judgment dated 16.12.2020 of the Hon'ble High Court of Kerala in W.P (C) 28139/2020.

Annexure A3- True copy of the Interim Order dated 22.12.2020 in OA No.180/00632/2020 of this Tribunal.

Annexure A4- True copy of the Interim Order dated 22.12.2020 in OA No.180/00631/2020 of this Tribunal.

Annexure A5- True copy of the order No. 50/MDE/2020 dated 4.11.2020 of the 1st respondent.

Annexure A6- True copy of the Order No.V/MD 226/ERS/ Staff dated 5.11.2020 issued by the 2nd respondent.

Annexure A7- True copy of the Order dated 30.06.2021 granting promotion to R.Saji and Shyamkumar.

Annexure A8- True copy of the Order dated 02.07.2021 of the 4th respondent Assistant Personnel Officer.Central Administrative Tribunal

Annexure A9- True copy of the print out of the relevant pages of the online portal of the Railway Administration.

Annexure A10- True copy of the notification dated 02.09.2022 issued by the Divisional Office.

Annexure A11- True copy of the Notification dated 27.11.2020 issued by the 3rd respondent.

Annexure R1- True copy of the Office Order No. 50/MDE/2020 dated 04.11.2020.

Annexure R2- True copy of the letter dated 26.02.2016, relieving the applicant for the training on SPART at Diesel Traction Training Centre/ Golden Rock Workshop, Tiruchirappalli.

Annexure R3- True copy of the salary details showing Breakdown Allowance (BDA) received by the applicant during 2018 and 2019.

Annexure R4- True copy of the seniority list of Sr. Tech/DSL/Mechanical for the year 2025.