DR Kavita Koria vs WESTERN RAILWAY on 7 October 2026

1. In the instant OA, the applicant who is a Doctor and working as ACMS at Divisional Railway Hospital at Sabarmati, Ahmedabad, being aggrieved with Gazetted Office Order No. 220/2026 dated 03.09.2026 (Annexure A/1) issued by the General Manager (E), Western Railway whereby she has been ordered to be transferred to Rajkot to the post of ACMS/Rajkot and it is also directed vide said order that on assumption of the post of ACMS/RJT she will also look after the additional duties of CMS/RJT, has filed the present OA under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act 1985 seeking relief as prayed for in para 8 and interim relief as prayed for in para 9 of the OA.

2. In support of the prayer sought in this OA, Mr. Joy Mathew learned counsel for the applicant mainly submitted as under:- 2.1 That the impugned order is contrary to the Transfer Policy in vogue more particularly, the impugned order dated 03.09.2026 (Annexure A/1) has been passed without there being any recommendation of the Placement Committee which is mandatory in nature. 2.2 In this regard, learned counsel for the applicant relied on the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of T.S.R. Subramanian & Ors. Vs. Union of India decided on 31.10.2013 (Annexure A/6) and also the order passed by this Tribunal in O.A. No. 457/2015 in case of Shri Atul Sureshsingh Vs. Union of India & Ors. decided on 25.07.2016 (Annexure A/8) and submits that any decision of Transfer of the Railway Employee that too without there being any recommendation of the Placement Committee is bad in law. 2.3 Further, it is submitted that on receipt of the impugned order dated 03.09.2026 (Annexure A/1), the applicant submitted a detailed representation on 07.09.2026 (Annexure A/3) to the General Manager (E), Western Railway wherein she has explained that her seniors who are working with her have not been transferred, however, she has been singled out and transferred which is in violation of the Transfer Policy. The applicant also mentioned other grounds in her representation and requested the Competent Authority to retain her at Ahmedabad. 2.4 It is submitted that the said representation of the applicant dated 07.09.2026 (Annexure A/3) has not been considered by the respondents, till date. The applicant has not been relieved as on date since she is undergoing training at Secunderabad which is organized by the Railway Authorities. It is the serious apprehension of the applicant that the respondents will relieve her without considering her representation. Hence, this OA.

3. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and perused the material available on record.

4. Considering the aforesaid submissions, judgments as well as grounds stated in the OA, prima facie we are of the considered opinion that the applicant has made out a case for intervention of this Tribunal; we "Issue Notice" to the respondents on "OA" as well as on "Interim Relief", returnable on 21.10.2026. In the meantime, by way of an ad-interim relief, we direct the respondents to mantain the Status Quo and not relieve the applicant from her existing place of working i.e. ACMS/DRH-SBI/ADI pursuant to Impugned Order dated 03.09.2026 (Annexure A/1).

5. List the matter on 21.10.2026.

6. D.S. is permitted through the applicant for the Respondent No. 3 and liberty is granted to serve the Respondents No. 1, 2 & 4 through speed post.

Sanjiv Kumar Member (A) Jayesh V Bhairavia Member (J) Pratik Vyas ( steno 'c' )