AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Per: Mr. Narendra Kumar Johari, Member (J):
Learned counsel for both the parties are present. Heard.
The Counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant is working in the Central Intelligence Unit and is currently posted at Patna Airport. She has a 25 year old child who is suffering from Epilepsy and Autism with undeveloped brain.
Vide order dated 20.01.2026, the applicant has been ordered to be transferred from Patna to Kolkata. Earlier, on account of the illness of her son, the applicant was transferred from Lucknow to Patna. Thereafter, in 2019, another transfer order was passed to Patna transfer her to Amritsar but the same was cancelled on the same medical grounds of her son. Again, on 11.09.2025, the applicant was ordered to be transferred to Jehanabad/Arwal unit, but that order was also cancelled.
Vide order dated 20.01.2026, she was ordered to be relieved by 31.01.2026. On the medical grounds of her son, her relieving date was extended till 30.04.2026. The date was extended again on the same grounds, extending her relieving date till 31.07.2026, and further it has been extended till 30.09.2026. Counsel for the applicant has submitted that while the extensions of the relieving dates the authorities has considered the medical condition of her son, but now the opposite parties are refusing to extend the relieving period any further whereas the same medical condition of her son is still persisting.
Counsel for the applicant further submitted that on the basis of DoP&T OMs dated 08.10.2018 and 03.02.2024, certain relaxations have been granted to the parents of disabled children. Aggrieved by the above transfer order, the applicant submitted several representations to the department's competent authority on various dates, i.e., on 29.01.2026, 22.04.2026, 27.04.2026, 10.07.2026, 13.07.2026, and 09.09.2026, but the same could not be considered/decided by authority concern.
After arguing to some extent, counsel for the applicant submitted that the grievance of the applicant in the present OA will be Patna satisfied at this stage, if her representation is decided by the competent authority (Opposite Party No. 2) in accordance with the law/rules by way of a speaking order after due consideration. He further requested that the applicant may be given an opportunity to submit a fresh representation in light of her earlier representations before the authority concerned, and the authority concerned may be directed to decide the same within a stipulated time period. Counsel for the applicant also submitted that the applicant has a genuine case which is supported by the DoP&T OMs, as the son of the applicant is suffering from a critical medical illness/disability and being mother she has to look after him, therefore, in such a situation the above transfer order is causing mental agony to the applicant.
Counsel for the opposite parties has not objected to the innocuous prayer for disposal of her representation as made by the counsel for the applicant.
In view of above submissions made by counsel for applicant, the present OA is decided without entering into the merit of the case with the direction that if the applicant submits her fresh representation, including the copies of earlier representations within one week from today, the concerned authority shall consider and decide the same by passing a reasoned and speaking order, in accordance with law/rules, within a period of 30 days from the date of submission of her fresh representation Patna to the department.
Till consideration and disposal of the above representations, the transfer order of the applicant dated 20.01.2026 shall be kept in abeyance.
With these directions, the original application is disposed of.
There shall be no order as to costs.