AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
PER: JUSTICE S. SUJATHA, MEMBER (J)
This application is filed by the applicant under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 seeking the following reliefs:
“(i)To quash the Memo No. SK/STA/0-2/GOs/RT/2026-27-Part (1) dated the 11.09.2026, issued by the respondent No. 3, Annexure A3, transferring the applicant as SPOs, Shivamogga with immediate effect, so far it relates to the applicant.
(ii)Direct the respondent No. 2 to consider the representation Central Administrative Tribunalsubmitted by the applicant dated 12.09.2026, Annexure A4 and continue him as Senior Postmaster, Mangaluru and
(iii)Grant such other relief deemed fit, having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case.”
Facts in brief as narrated by the applicant are that the applicant while working as SPOs, Mandya was transferred as Senior Postmaster, Mangaluru Head Post Office vide order dated 02.01.2026, and accordingly, took charge on 13.01.2026. However, the applicant has now been transferred as SPOs, Shivamogga in terms of the memo dated 11.09.2026. Being aggrieved by the said transfer before completion of his tenure and during the midst of the academic year, the applicant submitted a representation to the Respondent No. 2 on 12.09.2026 to cancel his transfer order and continue him as Senior Postmaster, Mangaluru to tide over his personal problems. The same is not responded to, hence, this OA.
Learned counsel Shri A.R. Holla representing the applicant submits that the impugned order of transfer (Annexure A3) would cause the applicant hardship, jeopardising the studies of his son in the mid of academic year. The applicant has not even completed eight months of his service in Mangaluru, and as such, his premature transfer is not justified. The applicant's father died Central Administrative Tribunalrecently on 25.06.2026, and as such, he is required to look after his aged mother. Hence, the applicant submitted a representation, but of no avail.
We have carefully considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the applicant and perused the material on record.
It appears that the applicant has been transferred vide Memo dated 11.09.2026 (Annexure A3) from Mangaluru to Shivamogga and a detailed representation has been given by him dated 12.09.2026 (Annexure A4) requesting the Respondent No. 2 to continue him as Senior Postmaster, Mangaluru, the same is pending.
In the facts and circumstances of the case, without going into the merits and demerits of the case, we direct the Respondent No. 2 to consider the representation submitted by the applicant dated 12.09.2026 (Annexure A4) and take a decision in accordance with law by passing a speaking order in an expedite manner, in any event not later than eight weeks from the date of receipt of the certified copy of this order.
Till such decision is taken, the impugned transfer order dated 11.09.2026 (Annexure A3) issued by the Respondent No. 3 Central Administrative Tribunal shall be kept in abeyance as far as the applicant is concerned.
OA stands disposed of in terms of above.
No order as to costs.