O.A. 371 of 2023 Filed by Shri Vijay Kumar Sharma Vs. UOI & Ors.

before the CAT, Jaipur Bench – Parawise Reply

Para Contents of Original Application Office Reply

No.
4.1 to Self-Introductory Paras No comments
4.4
4.3 to That the applicant during his service transferred at The applicant was transferred from Nawa to Jaipur Hqrs.
4.5 different places. That the applicant was working at vide Salt Commissioner’s order C.No.
Nawa as Dy. Sudt. of Salt and he was transferred 1/DSC/HQRS/CONF/2023/1146 dated 05.04.2023.
from Nawa to Jaipur Hqrs. vide order dated Accordingly, he was relieved from Nawa vide Order C.No.
05.04.2023. In compliance of the order dated 1(1)Admn/2022/629 dated 26.04.2023 of the O/o
05.04.2023, the applicant was relieved from Nawa Superintendent of Salt, Nawa. Before his joining at Jaipur
vide order dated 26.04.2023. Hqrs., the transfer order was modified vide order C.No.
1/DSC/HQRS/CONF/2023/1491 dated 02.05.2023 and he
That prior to joining at Jaipur office, the was asked to join duty at to Regional Office, Mumbai.,
Respondents all of sudden again transferred the instead of at Salt Commissioner’s Office at Jaipur.
Applicant vide impugned order dated 02.05.2023
from Jaipur HQRS to Regional Office Mumbai, As per the Department Land Statistics, the value of
within a period of less than a month second Departmental land in Mumbai is very high and complicated
transfer order was passed, which shows non- court cases are there, therefore, the Regional Office,
application of mind and arbitrariness on the part of Mumbai required adequate strengthening in terms of
Respondents. Manpower.

4.6 That it is further submitted that the mother of the No comments

Applicant is more than 89 years old and she had
undergone amputation of her left leg in February,
2022 and currently she is handicapped and she is
totally dependent on help for her daily routines and
she requires constant care.
4.7 That it is further important to submit that the wife of No comments
the Applicant is also in State Govt. service and
working as a Lecturer in Govt. Senior Secondary
School, Nawa City, District-Nagaur, Rajasthan.
4.8 That in the above mentioned facts and Representation dated 04.05.2023, of Smt. Kavita Sharma
circumstances of the case the Applicant submitted W/o Shri Vijay Kumar Sharma addressed to Additional
O.A. 371 of 2023 Filed by Shri Vijay Kumar Sharma Vs. UOI & Ors. before the CAT, Jaipur Bench – Parawise Reply

a detailed representation stating his plight, before Secretary, DPIIT, New Delhi, was disposed of after careful
the Respondent and requested to cancel the consideration vide order C.No.
impugned transfer order. A copy of the 1/DSC/HQRS/CONF/2023/1921 dated 01.06.2023.
representation dated 04.05.2023 is annexed
herewith and marked as Annexure-A/8. However,
the Respondent Authority without applying its mind
and with a non-speaking, non-reasoned order
dated 01.06.2023 rejected the representation of
the applicant sent through her wife and directed
the applicant to join at the transferred place.
4.9 That in the above backdrop Applicant has been left No comments
with no other alternative and efficacious remedy
except to invoke the jurisdiction of this Hon'ble
Tribunal under Section 19 of the Administrative
Tribunal Act, 1985 to get his grievances redressed
inter alia on the following grounds: -
5 GROUNDS: Grounds are as under: - 1. The statistics clearly depict the seriousness of shortage
of DSS in Mumbai region.
a) Because the impugned order is per-se illegal,
unlawful, and erroneous on the face of record itself 2. RO, Mumbai neither has a regular DSC nor ASC, nor
therefore the same is liable to be quashed and set faces several complicated land disputes.
aside.
3. Given the value of land in Mumbai is very high and
b) Because, the Respondent authority while complicated court cases are there, there is no denying the
passing the impugned order has not taken into fact that RO, Mumbai needs adequate strengthening in
consideration the fact that the Applicant was terms of manpower.
transferred one month back from Nawa to Jaipur
Headquarter therefore, the impugned order passed 4. Sh. Vijay Kumar Sharma, DSS, has been in Rajasthan
by the Respondent Authority is without application throughout the while, and in view of organizational need,
of mind and same is liable to be quashed and set transfer of another region that too after spending long time
aside by this Hon'ble Tribunal. of about after 28 years in Rajasthan is justified.

c) Because the impugned Transfer Order is without

O.A. 371 of 2023 Filed by Shri Vijay Kumar Sharma Vs. UOI & Ors. before the CAT, Jaipur Bench – Parawise Reply

Application of Mind and contrary to the Office The Posting details of Shri Vijay Kumar Sharma, Dy.
Memorandum dated 30th September, 2009) issued Superintendent of Salt, are as follow :-
by the Government of India, Ministry of Personnel,
Public Grievances and Pension (Department of S.No. Office Period
Personnel and Training) wherein the Government To From
of India has issued certain guidelines regarding 1. STL, Phalodi, 07.07.1995 31.08.2001
posting of husband and wife at the same station Jodhpur (Rajasthan)
wherein in Guideline No. 7 it has been held that 2. Factory Office, 01.09.2001 29.10.2002
where one spouse is employed under the Central Phalodi, Jodhpur
Government and the other spouse is employed (Rajasthan)
under the State Government, the spouse employed 3. STL, Nawa, Nagaur 02.12.2002 05.11.2009
under the Central Government may apply to the (Rajasthan)
Competent Authority and the Competent Authority 4. D.O. Jodhpur 06.11.2009 25.04.2016
may post the said Officer to the Station or if there (Rajasthan)
is no post in that station, to the State where the 5. Factory Office, Rajas, 26.04.2016 02.02.2017
other spouse is posted. In this regard it is Nagaur (Rajasthan)
submitted that the wife of the Applicant is posted 6. Factory Office, Nawa, 13.02.2017 26.04.2023
as Lecturer in the Government Senior Secondary Nagaur (Rajasthan) (Relieved)
School, Nawa and is a State Government
Employee and the Applicant was earlier working at
Nawa only and thereafter vide transfer order dated 5. As per O.M. dated 30.09.2009 of the Government of
5th April, 2023 he was transferred from Nawa to India, Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pension
Jaipur Hqrs and after the said Transfer Order he (Department of Personnel and Training), Guideline No. (vii)
was again transferred from Jaipur Hqrs. to state that
Regional Office, Mumbai which is around more “Where one spouse is employed under the Central Govt.
than 1100 KMS from his present place of posting. and the other spouse is employed under the State Govt.:-
It is therefore, the impugned Transfer order is The spouse employed under the Central Govt. may apply
passed by the Respondent Authority without to the competent authority and the competent authority may
application of mind and contrary to the Office post the said officer to the station or if there is no post in
Memorandum dated 30th September, 2009 issued that station to the State where the other spouse is posted.”
by the Government of India, Department of The guidelines of OM F.No. 28034/9/2009-Estt(A) dated
Personnel and Training. A copy of the Office 30.9.2009 have been followed by the Department since the
Memorandum dated 30.09.2009. joining of the applicant in the department in 1995. But now
O.A. 371 of 2023 Filed by Shri Vijay Kumar Sharma Vs. UOI & Ors. before the CAT, Jaipur Bench – Parawise Reply

due to above exigencies, he has been transferred to

Regional Office, Mumbai.
d) Because, the Respondent Authority has also
acted contrary to the Office Memorandum dated 6. As per O.M. dated 08.10.2018 issued by the Government
08.10.2018 Issued by the Government of India, of India, Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and
Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions, Department of Personnel and Training, Condition
Pensions, Department of Personnel and Training No. 3(i) which state that
wherein the Government of India has exempted “Government Employees who is a care giver of dependent
from the routine exercise of transfer/rotational daughter/son/parents/spouse/brother/sister with specified
transfers to certain employees. The Government of disability is exempted from the routine exercise of
India in the said Office Memorandum vide transfer/rotational transfer subject to the administrative
condition No. 3(1) has stated that a Government constraints.”
Employees who is a care giver of dependent The transfer of applicant has been made to Regional Office,
daughter/son/parents/spouse/brother/sister with Mumbai due to administrative constraints. Hence the above
specified disability is exempted from the routine guidelines stipulated in the OM dated 08.10.2018 cannot be
exercise of transfer/rotational transfer. That in the followed due to administrative constraints and to safeguard
present case the Applicant is having 89 years old the interest of the Government.
mother and undergone amputation of left leg and
she is handicapped and totally dependent on the
help. That the Applicant and his wife both are in
Government Service and they had to take care of
the old age parent alternatively and this particular
aspect of the case and the Office Memorandum
dated 08.10.2018 has been completely ignored by
the Respondent Authority while passing the
impugned Transfer order and rejecting the
representation of the Applicant. Therefore, the
impugned order is liable to be quashed and set
aside by this Hon'ble Tribunal being contrary to the
Office Memorandum dated 08.10.2018.

e) Because the Respondent Authority has also not

considered the facts that the mother of Applicant is
O.A. 371 of 2023 Filed by Shri Vijay Kumar Sharma Vs. UOI & Ors. before the CAT, Jaipur Bench – Parawise Reply

seriously ill and badly needs proper attention and

care and except the Applicant nobody else in his
family to take care of her.

f) Because the Applicant is being victimized by the

respondents and he has been transferred from one
place to other without any justified reason which
clearly shows malafide on the part of the
respondents therefore, also the impugned transfer
order is liable to be quashed and set aside.

g) Because the impugned transfer order is without

application of mind in as much as the Respondent
Authority while passing the impugned transfer
order has not considered the fact that the place
from the where the Applicant is being transferred
i.e. Jaipur, is still lying vacate, therefore the
impugned transfer order is liable to be quashed
and set aside by this Hon'ble Tribunal.

h) Because Applicant would suffer irreparable loss

in case petitioner is being forced to join his duties
at Mumbai. Because the Respondent Authority has
rejected the representation of the Applicant without
considering the it on merits and rejected the same
without applying due mind and with non-speaking
and non-reasoned order,