Tribunals and CommissionsSingle Bench(2026) 09 CAT CK 5213

Shyam Narayan Patel vs Employees State Insurance Corporation & Ors.

Central Administrative Tribunal · Decided on 28 September 2026

HON’BLE JUDGES
Ajay Pratap Singh, Member (J)
RESULT
Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
OA 3646/2026

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

18 paragraphs · 752 words

Heard the parties.

2.

The applicant is working as Junior Engineer (Civil) in ESIC and by way of the present OA is seeking direction to the respondents to set aside the impugned transfer order dated 07.09.2026 (Annexure-1) and also quash and set aside the impugned relieving order dated 07.09.2026 (Annexure A-2) and accommodate the applicant at the original place of posting at ESIC Model Hospital, Gurugram, Haryana till the completion of tenure as per the Transfer Policy dated 19.12.2024 (Annexure A-5).

3.

The grievance of the applicant as projected by the learned counsel for the applicant can be summarized as under-

(i)

The applicant joined as Junior Engineer (Civil) in ESIC and thereafter was transferred vide order dated 14.07.2023 from ESCI-HQ to ESIC Model Hospital, Gurugram, Haryana and joined on 16.09.2023.

(ii)

The applicant has not completed the tenure of 10 years in Delhi and Delhi-NCR region and transfer order dated 07.09.2026 is contrary Transfer Policy dated 19.12.2024 and the respondent No. 02 transferred the applicant in haste and relieved order issued on very same day i.e. 07.09.2026 without giving him the chance to apply for TTA advance as per rules and the transfer order dated 07.09.2026 is malice in law and actuated by malafides.

(iii)

The applicant has submitted representation dated 09.09.2026 (Annexure A-4) to consider his case for posting at the original place as he has not completed 10 years in Delhi and Delhi-NCR region. So also stated no option has been sought from him and he has been transferred 2300 kms away from the present place of posting.

(iv)

The applicant has to look after his old-age parents and the representation dated 09.09.2026 is still pending and no one has been posted in place of the applicant.

4.

Issue notice to the respondents.

5.

Dr. Divya Swamy, the learned counsel appears on advance service, accepts notice and service of notice to the respondents is waived off.

6.

Learned counsel appearing for the applicant, after arguing for some time, submits that the applicant would be satisfied if respondents are directed to consider and decide the pending representation of the applicant dated 09.09.2026 (Annexure A-4) in a stipulated time frame.

7.

The learned counsel for the respondents fairly submits that the pending representation of the applicant dated 09.09.2026 (Annexure A-4) shall be considered by the respondents in accordance with law.

8.

Heard with consent. This Tribunal has considered the matter. In similar OA No 1477/2025 vide order dated 24.04.2025(CAT, Principal Bench, Nainital Circuit Sitting) has passed order to consider and decide the pending representation before the National Litigation Committee within a period of 30 days and till then, interim protection has been granted. The applicant has been transferred from ESIC Model Hospital, Gurugram, Haryana to Regional Office, Puducherry and no one has been transferred in his place at the original place of posting. The applicant has challenged the impugned transfer order dated 07.09.2026 on the basis of Transfer Policy dated 19.12.2024 as he has not completed 10 years in Delhi and Delhi-NCR region and same is malice in law and there is no administrative exigencies and no has been transferred in his place at the original place of posting.

9.

The Division Bench of Hon’ble High Court of Madhya Pradesh in case of R.S. Chaudhary Vs. State of M.P. & Ors, reported in ILR (2007) MP 1329, held after considering catena of judgments by Hon’ble Supreme Court that in case an order of transfer is assailed on the ground that there has been violation of the Transfer Policy, the proper remedy is to approach the authorities by pointing out the violation and it is expected of the authorities to deal with the same keeping in mind the policy guidelines with utmost objectivity.

10.

For the reasons stated hereinabove, this Tribunal pass the following order(s):

(i)

The competent Authority amongst the respondents is directed to consider and decide the pending representation of the applicant dated 09.09.2026 (Annexure A-4) within a period of three weeks by passing a reasoned and speaking order from the date of receipt of certified copy of order passed today and till such time, the impugned orders dated 07.09.2026 (Annexure A-1 & A-2) shall be kept in abeyance and applicant shall be allowed to continue at the original place of posting.

11.

In view whereof, the present OA stands disposed of at admission stage itself in above indicated terms.

12.

Resultantly, pending MA(s), if any, also stands disposed of.

13.

However, there shall be no order as to costs.