AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Hon’ble Dr. Anand S Khati, Member (A):):-
In the present Original Application, filed under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, the applicant hahas prayed for the following reliefs:
“a. Quash and set aside the impugned order dated 02.09.2025 (Annexure A-1) rejecting the applicant's request for cancellation of mutual transfer.
b. Direct the respondents to cancel the applicant's mutual transfer request in view of the subsequent representations dated 02.07.2025, 28.07.2025 and 04.08.2025, and the legal notice dated 07.08.2025 on account of his compelling family and medical circumstances of the applicant.
c. Direct the respondents not to disturb the lien and seniority of the applicant in his current unit/post.
d. This Hon'ble Tribunal may be pleased to pass such other suitable order or orders it may deem fit to meet the ends of justice.”
The Applicant is serving as Senior Section Engineer (SSE) in the TRS Department, Tughlakabad, West Central Railway, New Delhi. On 13.05.2025, he submitted a request for mutual transfer through the HRMS module. Subsequently, before the mutual transfer could be finalised, the Applicant's family circumstances changed substantially. His father was diagnosed with post-void urinary retention and was shifted to Delhi for better medical treatment. Around the same period, the Applicant's wife, who had delivered a child through C-section, developed postpartum complications requiring regular medical attention and day-toto-day care and support. She too was shifted from Bihar to Delhi for treatment. The Applicant claims to be the only male family member available to attend to both his ailing father and wife. In view of the changed and unforeseen family and medical circumstances, the Applicant submitted a request dated 02.07.2025 seeking cancellation/withdrawal of his pending mutual transfer request. As no decision was commumunicated, he submitted further representations dated 28.07.2025 and 04.08.2025, followed by a legal notice dated 07.08.2025, requesting consideration of his request for withdrawal of the mutual transfer. The Respondents, however, vide impugned order dated 02.09.2025, rejected the request, relying upon Para IV of RBE No. 8/2019 on the ground that once mutual transfer is agreed to by both parties and approved by the competent authority, withdrawal is impermissible.
Learned counsel for the applicant contends that the mutual transfer had not been finally implemented when he sought withdrawal and that his request was necessitated by subsequent medical and family exigencies. He further relies upon Para 10 of RBE No. 8/2019, contending that mutual transfer cases are required to be processed within the prescribed period of 60 days, which period had already elapsed.
Learned counsel for the applicant also places reliance on the letter dated 12.11.2009 of Ministry of Railways, Railway Board on the subject Inter-Railway and Intra-Railway transfers on mutual exchange, which reads as under:
“As per Board’s letter of even number dated 21.04.06 requests for backtracking from the orders issued for transfer on mutual exchange basis, should not be entertained under any circumstances and strict adherence of the orders issued, is required to be ensured. Instances have come to notice that requests for backtracking have been considered by Railways. This have been viewed seriously by the Railway Board. Railways are requested to ensure strict compliance of the extant instructions.”
In support of his case, learned counsel for the applicant relies upon various case laws, which are as follows:
i). The judgment passed by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Tribunal at Lucknow in O.A. No. 332/00100 of 2025 dated 17.04.2025 titled Sandeep Kumar vs. Union of India and Ors., which reads as under:
“6.1It is noted that mutual transfers are allowed, but backtracking from such mutual arrangement is not allowed in terms of the Railway Board's letter dated 21.04.2006 extracted below:
"Sub: Inter-Railway and Intra-Railway transfers on mutual exchange. As the Railways are aware in terms of extant procedures in vogue vide para 310 of Indian Railway Establishment Manual, Vol. 1, 1989, transfers on the basis of mutual exchange are allowed with no loss or minimum loss of seniority. Instances have come to notice where employees make request for such mutual exchange transfer and later on backout when orders are issued and even after one of the two employees gets relieved to join the new place.
2.Board have reviewed the matter and decided that as mutual transfers are ordered with the consent of both the parties, it should be made clear right at the time of forwarding applications for mutual transfer that no request for backtracking from mutual exchange arrangement will be entertained under any circumstances. Strict adherence to this procedure may please be ensured." (emphasis supplied) It is observed that fructification of mutual exchange arrangement is dependent on the request or consent of the two employees seeking such mutual transfer as well as the approval of the railway units to which they belong. It is only after the employees as well as the units to whom they belong have agreed to the mutual exchange that the order effecting such mutual exchange is issued by the respondents. Once the order is issued with the consent of both the parties, no backtracking is permissible.
6.2It is further noted that, vide paragraph 10 of the Railway Board’s letter dated 11.01.2019, model timeline have been prescribed to deal with the cases of mutual transfer as follows:
“10.Model Timelines to deal with Mutual Transfer cases:
S. No. Activity
(i) Forwarding of applications by Supervisors to the Personnel Department of the Division: It should be verified at the stage that the prescribed application form is complete in all respects duly signed by both employees and the information given therein is correct. In case of Workshop staff, this will be done at the Workshop itself.
10 days
(ii) Forwarding by Division Personnel Department:
a) Division Controlled Posts Divisional Personnel Department will forward the request application with necessary documents directly to the Division concerned to which transfer is sought. The name and designation of the officer signing the letter should invariably be mentioned in the forwarding letter. In respect of Workshop staff, this will be done by the Chief Workshop Manager (CWM) or by lower authority to whom the powers may be re-designated
(b) HQ controlled posts - Personnel Department will forward the application with all the necessary documents to Zonal HQ (CPO office).
15 days
(iii) Forwarding by HQ Personnel deptt (For HQ controlled posts)- On receipt of the application duly forwarded from Division/Workshop, the HQ Personnel Deptt office will forward to the Zonal Rly/PSU concerned.
15 days
(iv) Conveying of acceptance - The counterpart HQ/Division to issue their acceptance to forwarding HQ/Division (as the case may be).
10 days
(v) Issue of transfer order - On receipt of consent from the receiving HQ/Division, the transfer orders should be issued.
10 days
(vi) Dispatch of LPC and Service Records - Personnel Department concerned should ensure that the LPC and Service Record of the employee(s) are sent expeditiously to the new Division/Zone etc. in terms of Board's letter number E(NG)I-2001/TR/16 dated 21.11.2001. Attested Xerox copy of the Service Record should be given to the employee concerned
15 days
It follows from the above that as per the model timelines prescribed by the Railway Board the order for transfer on mutual exchange should be issued within 60 days, or two months, of the application made by the employee for such transfer.
7.1It is not in dispute that the applicant made an application dated 28.05.2024 for mutual transfer with respondent no. 5 and that during the pendency of the application for mutual transfer, the applicant was given NOC, vide letter dated 24.09.2024, by the respondents, for document verification and medical examination in response to advertisement/notification no. CEN/01/2019. As pointed out by learned counsel for the applicant, the letter dated 24.09.2024 conveying the NOC states that if the applicant is selected on the advertised posts, he shall be relieved after the approval of his controlling officer. It is also not in dispute that the applicant requested for cancellation of mutual transfer and acceptance of his technical resignation vide his letter dated 26.09.2024 which was received by the respondents on the same day. Admittedly, it was only after the receipt of the applicant's request for cancellation of mutual transfer that the case for mutual transfer was approved on 27.09.2024 by the respondents. It is observed that the approval stated to have been accorded on 27.09.2024 exceeded the model timeline of two months prescribed by the Railway Board. Even after the approval for mutual transfer, no order was issued (only a draft order is stated to have been prepared on 09.10.2024). The respondents finally issued the impugned order dated 24.01.2025 directing the applicant to join under respondent no. 4 on mutual transfer without addressing the applicant's request for cancellation of mutual transfer and acceptance of technical resignation to join the post of Goods Guard offered to him. A perusal of the order dated 24.01.2025 reveals that it makes no reference to their own NOC dated 24.09.2024 and the applicant's request dated 26.09.2024 for cancellation of mutual transfer and acceptance of technical resignation.
7.2Three relevant issues arise from the above narrative. First, the applicant withdrew his request for mutual transfer on 26.09.2024, i.e., before the mutual transfer was approved on 27.09.2024. Second, the approval of mutual transfer was made by the respondents on 27.09.2024 ignoring their own NOC dated 24.09.2024 which stated that the applicant shall be relieved on his selection on approval of his controlling officer. Third, the approval for mutual transfer accorded on 27.09.2024 was beyond the prescribed model timeline of two months from the date of application. i.e., 28.05.2024.
7.3Once a party to the agreement withdraws from or asks for cancellation of the agreement before it is consented to or approved by all the parties to such agreement, it cannot normally have legal force. In the instant case, the respondents no. 1 to 3 approved the mutual transfer on 27.09.2024, i.e., after the applicant asked for its cancellation on 26.09.2024, which was impermissible. For the same reason, no right is created in favour of respondent no. 5 as no order for mutual transfer was issued before the applicant withdrew his request. The respondents no. 1 to 3 cannot blow hot and cold by not accepting the applicant's technical resignation and not sparing him to join the new post on one hand, when they themselves have granted the NOC to the applicant on the other. Before parting, it is observed that the model timelines have not been adhered to by the respondents. The circumstances underlying the requests for mutual transfer may change over time because of material changes in family circumstances, or in career (promotion or selection etc.). That is why adhering to the time bound process is relevant to avoid disputes.
8.1In view of the foregoing, the order dated 24.01.2025 relating to mutual transfer is quashed and set aside.
8.2The respondents no. 1 to 3 are directed to consider acceptance of the applicant's technical resignation and his relieving to join the post offered to him vide letter dated 06.12.2024, without linking them to the mutual transfer, within one month of the receipt of certified copy of this order.
8.3Considering the peculiar circumstances of this case, respondents no. 1 to 3 and respondent no. 4 shall forward the case of respondent no. 5with their respective views to the Railway Board for taking an appropriate decision qua respondent no. 5 within three months of the receipt of certified copy of this order.
8.4This OA is disposed of in the above terms.
8.5Pending MAs, if any, also stand disposed of.
8.6The parties shall bear their own costs.”
ii). The judgment passed by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Tribunal at Patna in O.A. No. 050/00095/18 dated 22.01.2019 titled Rajeev Kumar Singh and Anr. vs. Union of India and Ors.
iii). The judgment passed by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Tribunal at Ahmedabad in O.A. No. 422/2019 dated 22.09.2022 titled Shri Rajendra Kumar vs. The General Manager, Western Raiways and Ors.
iv). The judgment passed by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Tribunal at Jaipur in O.A. No. 451/2022 dated 28.02.2024 titled Sonvir Singh vs. Union of India and Ors.
On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents opposes the grant of relief and relies upon the averments made in the counter affidavit. He submits that an application was received in this office requesting the cancellation of the mutual inter-railway transfer application No. MT00057238 between the applicant and Smt. Divya Saloni, SSE/SER/ADRA Division. As per Para 4 (IV) of Railway Board's letter RBE No. 08/2019, withdrawal from mutual transfer arrangement is not permissible after consent for mutual exchange has been accorded. This is because such transfers are affected with the mutual consent of both parties, and it is clearly stated at the time of processing that once the consent is given, any subsequent request for withdrawal from the mutual exchange arrangement shall not be entertained under any circumstances. Accordingly, it is informed that the inter-railway mutual transfer application No. MT00057238 between the applicant and Smt. Divya Saloni has been duly approved by the competent authorities of both divisions, and the draft order for the said mutual inter-railway transfer has been issued in the HRMS system. Further, Smt. Divya Saloni, SSE/SER/ADRA Division, has already assumed charge of the post of SSE/TRS (Level--7) under the Sr. Divisional Electrical Engineer/TRS/TKD in Kota Division under mutual transfer. The case for relieving Shri Parmendra Kumar for his posting to SE Railway/ADRA Division under the same mutual transfer arrangement is under process.
In rejoinder to the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the Respondents, learned counsel for the Applicant has drawn my attention to the order of this Tribunal dated 12.09.2025, whereby interim relief was granted to the Applicant with a direction to maintain status quo in respect of his present place of posting. He further submits that the Respondents have incorrectly portrayed the mutual transfer as having attained finality and as being irrevocable. It is contended that issuance of a “draft order” in HRMS, by itself, does not constitute a final and operative transfer order, particularly when no formal transfer or relieving order had been issued in respect of the Applicant prior to his withdrawal request dated 02.07.2025.
Having heard learned counsel for the parties and upon perusal of the pleadings and material available on record, this Tribunal finds that the issue involved in the present Original Application is squarely covered by the decisions of the Co-ordinate Benches of this Tribunal relied upon by learned counsel for the Applicant. In the facts and circumstances of the present case, particularly when the Applicant had sought withdrawal of his mutual transfer request on 02.07.2025, before he was formally relieved from his present post, and in view of the subsequent medical and family circumstances pleaded by him, no justification is made out for sustaining the impugned order dated 02.09.2025. The issuance of a draft order in HRMS, without issuance of a final transfer/relieving order qua the Applicant, cannot by itself be treated as final implementation of the mutual transfer so as to render the Applicant’s request for withdrawal ineffective. Accordingly, the impugned order warrants interference.
In view of the foregoing, the Original Application is allowed. The impugned order dated 02.09.2025 is hereby quashed and set aside. The respondents are directed to cancel/withdraw the Applicant’s mutual transfer request/application No. MT00057238 dated 13.05.2025, and shall not give effect to, or take any further action pursuant to, the said mutual transfer arrangement. The Applicant shall be permitted to continue at his present place of posting and his lien, seniority, service continuity and other consequential service benefits attached to his present unit/post shall remain protected, without being adversely affected by the mutual transfer request or the proceedings arising therefrom. The respondents shall also ensure that no relieving, transfer or posting order is issued against the Applicant pursuant to the aforesaid mutual transfer application.
The respondents shall give effect to the aforesaid directions forthwith and, in any event, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.
The Original Application stands disposed of in the aforesaid terms. All pending M.A.(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.