w w w . L a w y e r S e r v i c e s . i n

Har Ratan Singh v/s The Union of India, Through the Secretary to the Government of India, Revenue Department, Ministry of Finance, New Delhi & Others

Company & Directors' Information:- S P FINANCE PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U65990MH1979PTC021790

Company & Directors' Information:- RATAN CORPORATION LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74120MH1992PLC068199

Company & Directors' Information:- UNION FINANCE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U65910GJ1994PLC023717

Company & Directors' Information:- SINGH FINANCE LIMITED. [Active] CIN = U67120JK1986PLC000847

Company & Directors' Information:- K K SINGH FINANCE P LTD [Strike Off] CIN = U65920MH1993PTC075742

Company & Directors' Information:- NEW INDIA FINANCE LTD. [Strike Off] CIN = U65999WB1991PLC051652

Company & Directors' Information:- NEW K K FINANCE PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U65921UP1974PTC003887

    Original Application No. 040/00243 of 2017

    Decided On, 11 February 2020

    At, Central Administrative Tribunal Guwahati Bench Guwahati


    For the Applicant: M. Chanda, U. Dutta, Advocates. For the Respondents: S.K. Ghosh, Addl. C.G.S.C.

Judgment Text

Oral Order:

Manjula Das, Judicial Member.

1. By this OAfiled under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, the applicant is seeking following relief(s):-

“8.1 That the Hon’able Tribunal be pleased to set aside and quash the impugned transfer order No.73/2017 dtd.21.07.2017 (Annexure-2) as well as release order dtd. 08.08.2017 (Annexure-5) so far the applicant is concerned.

8.2 That the Hon’able Court be pleased to direct the respondents to accommodate the applicant at the present place of posting at Guwahati till his retirement on superannuation.

8.2A That the Hon’able Tribunal be pleased to direct the respondents to treat the period from 11.09.2017 to 13.11.2017 as duty for all purposes with a further declaration that the petitioner is entitled payment of salary for the period from 11.09.2017 to 13.11.2017.

8.3 Costs of the application.

8.4 Any other relief(s) to which the applicant is entitled as the Hon’able Tribunal may deem fit and proper,”

2. According to the applicant, he was sought to be transferred from Guwahati to Itanagar at the verge of retirement. Applicant also contended that his impugned transfer was made in the middle of academic session .Applicant also contended that his transfer was made in violation of para 4, clause 8 & 10, para 13 as well as clause 1 of Group C Drivers (so Far the applicant is concerned) of the transfer and posting guidelines of Customs and Central Excise.

3. Respondents have contested the claim of the applicant in their written statement. According to them, as per para 13 of the transfer and posting guidelines the officers with only two years for retirement shall be as per the policy issued by the DopT from time to time and the applicant has more than 2 years for retirement. According to the respondents, there was no violation of the guidelines in transferring the applicant. Respondents also contended that one of the grounds taken by the applicant in challenging his transfer that transfer order was issued in the mid academic session of his son is not acceptable inasmuch as his son was studying B.A. and children academic session is taken into consideration if his/her ward is in class 12th standard.

4. We have heard Sri M Chanda, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri S.K. Ghosh, learned Addl. C.G.S.C. for the respondents, and perused the pleadings on record.

5. Admittedly applicant is going to retire on 31.03.2020 on attaining the age of superannuation. This Tribunal while issuing notices to the respondents vide order dated 29.08.2017 had stayed the impugned transfer order dated 21.07.2017 so far the applicant is concerned his relive order dated 08.08.2017 till the disposal of the OA. No MA praying for vacation of the said interim order was filed by the respondents. As such, interim order is continuing till date. Thus applicant will be retiring by the end of this Month. The Hon’able Gauhati high Court in the case of Narayan Chowdhury vs. State of Tripura & Others WP(C) No.239/1999 reported in (2000) 1 GLR 519 held as under:-

“the petitioner is retiring towards the end of 2000 and he has to serve hardly one and half years, no practical purpose will be served by asking the writ petitioner to proceed to his place of posting just for a period of 5/6 months.’’

6. Thus, no practical purpose would be served by asking the applicant to join his transferred place and to serve for the remaining few days.


Please Login To View The Full Judgment!

. Therefore, impugned orders Nos. ii(3)/06/ET/CCO/SH/2017/3986-4024 dated 21.072017 so far the applicant is concerned and ii(3) 1/ET/CUS/GAU/2016/5997-6004 dated 08.08.2017 are set aside and quashed by making the interim order absolute. Respondents are directed to allow the applicant to retire from service from his present place of posting i.e. office of the Custom (p) Division, Guwahati.