Madhab Kumar and Others vs Union of India and Others

Heard learned counsel for the parties. The petitioners'' contention is that the respondent Railway itself decided to fill up the Group-D post in technical department of the Railway and petitioners were duly selected in that process for transfer to the technical department from the medical department. The petitioners were not relieved for joining on the transferred places and out of the total nine persons, two were relieved and they joined in the technical department. Thereafter, by impugned order dated 29th July, 2009 the transfer posting order was cancelled. According to the learned counsel for the petitioners by this way discriminatingly two persons were allowed to join on transfer whereas the writ petitioners have not been allowed to join and their transfer posting order has been cancelled.

The petitioners preferred O.A. No. 62 of 2010(R) before the Central Administrative Tribunal, Patna Bench, Circuit Bench at Ranchi which was dismissed vide order dated 8th February, 2011. Hence this writ petition.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that it is a clear case of discrimination and the petitioners were wrongly denied the benefit of getting more chance of promotion at the transferred place.

We are of the considered opinion that, merely because of the selection for particular post one cannot get the right and in the present case the petitioners are already in service and they have been transferred and two out of the nine were relieved and they joined that department, that doesn''t mean that it was a case of discrimination and situation has been explained by submitting that there was acute shortage of persons in the medical department. Even if this reason has not been recorded in the order, we do not find that any reason was non-explained reason.

Therefore, we do not find any merit in the writ petition. Hence, this writ petition is dismissed.