WP(C)/18950/2026 of RAMAKANTA MOHARANA Vs UNION OF INDIA on 24 June 2026

ORDER

24.06.2026

01. A Railway-employee transferred from one place to another with a distance of less than ten kilometres is knocking at the doors of the Writ Court for assailing the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT), Cuttack order dated 17.06.2026 whereby his O.A. No.290/2026 (Cuttack) challenging the transfer has been negatived.

2. Learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner vehemently argues that the transfer is mala fide; the transfer is to a post lower than what the Petitioner has been holding all through; Petitioner’s wife is suffering from acute Gynecological problems who is also working in Puri itself and therefore his proximity to the spouse is inevitable. He also tells that the Transfer Guidelines have been violated and this aspect having not been properly examined by the Tribunal, there is error apparent on the face of its order warranting interference of this Court. Learned DSGI assisted by learned Senior Panel Counsel, Mr. Kashyap vehemently opposes the transfer contending that the transfer is an incidence of service in the light of the decision of the Apex Court in B. Varadha Rao v. State of Karnataka; AIR 1986 SC 1955 and therefore, the Courts are not supposed to interfere especially even when the employer’s prerogative has been exercised taking into account all relevant factors. He also tells us, that the Petitioner was working in Puri during the period between 2002 & 2010 and thereafter again from 2011 to 2018 he was posted at Puri itself, even presently, he has been working in the said place and therefore, he cannot squat at the same place throughout his service.

3. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the petition papers, we are not inclined to grant indulgence in the matter inasmuch as the Tribunal has considered all aspects of the matter and arrived at a just decision. That apart, the contention of the Petitioner that his status as such is affected by the impugned order is not demonstrated despite vociferous submissions. It hardly needs to be stated that, how status is affected has to be demonstrated by the cogent material on the well established principles of jurisprudence.

4. The vehement submission of learned counsel for the Petitioner that because of this transfer order, his seniority and ranking are affected and therefore, that would diminish the promotional chances is bit difficult to countenance when there is a specific assurance by the DSGI that such things will not be done to any employee, much less to the Petitioner herein.

5. The next contention of the learned counsel for the Petitioner that there are many other candidates who have been in the same place far longer than the Petitioner, would not come to his aid. Ordinarily, it is the employer who decides which employee should be posted where and that would fall within the domain of employer’s prerogative, which Courts would not readily interfere with.

In the above circumstances, broadly agreeing with the submission of the learned DSGI, this Petition is disposed off.

Petitioner to join to the post pursuant to the transfer order within a period of one week and if he joins no disciplinary action or the kind shall be instituted against him.

(Krishna S. Dixit)

Judge

(Chittaranjan Dash) Judge

AK Pradhan/Priyanka Digitally Signed Signed by: PRIYANKA BARIK Reason: Authentication Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA, CUTTACK Date: 25-Jun-2026 17:05:49 Signature Not Verified