V.K.MATHUR,DINESH MAHESHWARI, JJ. - (1.) IN this writ petition, the petitioners, Union of India and its officers in the Department of Post, have questioned the order dated 01.01.2013 as passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Jodhpur Bench, Jodhpur ('CAT') in Original Application ('OA') No. 513/2011.
(2.) THE OA aforesaid was filed by the present respondent, working on the post of Postal Assistant, on the grievance against the order of his transfer to the Jodhpur Division from Barmer Head Office. The CAT, in its impugned order, formulated the following issues arising for determination in the case: - "1. Whether the transfer is punitive or has been made as administrative measures ? 2. Whether there is a lack of application of mind to the facts of this case or leading to miscarriage of justice ? 3. Whether the transfer is hit by the procedural irregularities or misapplication of laws of natural justice? 4. What relief, if any, could be given to the applicant ?" With reference to the facts of the case as also the law applicable, the CAT has decided the core of the issues Nos. 1 to 3 against the applicant -respondent. However, while dealing with the aspect of relief, the CAT took note of one factor of the case that the representation/s made by the applicant had not been considered or disposed of by the respondents. The CAT also indicated that there was a humanitarian aspect involved in the whole process inasmuch as the three daughters of the applicant were studying from college down to school at Barmer; and their studies would get dislocated on account of this transfer. Thus, even while not interfering with the transfer order, the CAT directed the competent authority to consider the representation/s of the applicant; and also made some more observations in paragraph -13 of the order impugned as under: - "13. As regards the 4th issue, it has to be answered based upon the discussions in the previous paragraphs. It stands to reason that the only point I find in favour of the applicant is that his representations have not been considered or disposed of and the respondents have not given any documentary proof nor they have stated to this effect. There is also a humanitarian aspect involved in the whole process that the three daughters of the applicant happen to be studying from college down to school at Barmer, their studies would get dislocated on account of this transfer. Hence, the following directives are given: i. While not holding any infirmity in the orders of transfer, the competent authority is directed to consider the representation(s) of the applicant on humanitarian grounds and perhaps pass an order posting the applicant to some convenient post so that the studies of his children do not get disturbed. ii. The competent authority may consider his representation within a period of three months. I am sure that the competent authority would appreciate that transfer to Jaisalmer is not the only way to serve the administrative purpose. It could have been equally well served perhaps by retaining the applicant in some other post in some other capacity at Barmer or nearby so that his family could be protected from such dislocation."
(3.) WE have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have perused the material placed on record. It is noticed that the CAT has specifically found that the order of transfer was not suffering from any infirmity; and the relief as claimed in the OA was required to be denied. However, on the humanitarian grounds and in the balance of equities, if the CAT directed the competent authority to consider the representation/s of the applicant, we are clearly of the view that indication further on the aspect as to what order may be passed by the respondents was not called for.;