Raj Kumar Sharma vs RAIL BHAWAN on 15 October 2026

1. Raj Kumar Sharma, aged about 43 years, son of Late L.P. Sharma, resident of 4234 D-MCF Colony, Lalganj, Raebareli.

2. Mohd Mojibuddin, aged about 41 years, son of Late Mohd Zahiruddin, Resident of - 4232 A- MCF Colony, Lalganj, Raebareli.

3. Shankar Prasad Vishwakarma, aged about 52 years, son of Late Nageshwar Prasad Vishwakarma, Resident of - 4221 C- MCF Colony, Lalganj, Raebareli.

4. Shailendra Kumar Dwivedi, aged about 52 years, son of Late Ganga Prasad Dwivedi, Resident of - 4226 D MCF Colony, Lalganj, Raebareli.

5. Basant Kumar Deharia, aged about 54 years, son of Late Poonaram Deharia, Resident of - 4215 D MCF Colony, Lalganj, Raebareli.

6. Hari Bans Singh, aged about 51 years, son of Late Bharat Ram, Resident of - 4251 B MCF Colony, Lalganj, Raebareli.

7. Ravi Kumar, aged about 48 years, son of Late Bhup Singh Gangwar, Resident of - 4210 A- MCF Colony, Lalganj, Raebareli. ...Applicant By Advocate: Shri Alok Kumar Tripathi

VERSUS

1. Union of India through Chairman, Railway Board, Rail Bhawan, New Delhi.

2. General Manager, Modern Coach Factory, Lalgnaj, Raebareli.

3. Principal Chief Personnel Officer /Competent Personnel authority, Modern Coach Factory, Lalganj, Raebareli. ...Respondents

By Advocate: Smt. Prayagmati Gupta

O R D E R (ORAL)

PER HON’BLE MR. PANKAJ KUMAR, MEMBER (A) In this case relating to the transfer, the applicants have sought the following reliefs:

a) To quash the impugned transfer order dated 01.10.2026 (contained as Annexure No. 1 to this OA), with all consequential benefits.

b) to allow the applicants to continue to work on the present place of posting i.e. Modern Coach Factory, Raebareli, with all consequential benefits.

c) to allow the applicants to withdraw their request for transfer made before issuance of new transfer policy.

d) to issue any other order or direction, which this Hon'ble Tribunal deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.

e) to allow the instant O.A. with costs

2. Heard the learned counsel for the applicants, learned counsel for the respondents and perused the records.

3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the instant O.A. may be disposed of as applicants are only seeking decision on the representation preferred by them and ends of justice would be served if a direction is given by this Tribunal to the respondents/competent authority to consider and dispose of the pending representation of the applicants attached as Annexure No. A-8 (page 90 & 91) of this OA in light of instructions dated 13.10.2026 issued by the respondents attached as Annexure A-9 (page 92) of this OA, by way of reasoned and speaking order within a stipulated period of time and prays that till the disposal of the representation, the applicants may not be transferred from their present place of posting.

4. Learned counsel for the respondents opposes the aforesaid prayer; however, submits that, if so directed, at least two months’ time may be given for disposal of applicant’s case in the said manner.

5.1 Keeping in view the innocuous prayer made by the applicant, this O.A. is disposed of, without going into the merits of the case, with a direction to the respondents/competent authority to consider and dispose of the representation of the applicants attached as Annexure No. A-8 (page 90 & 91) of this OA in light of instructions dated 13.10.2026 issued by the respondents attached as Annexure A-9 (page 92) of the OA, by way of reasoned and speaking order to be communicated to the applicants within two months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. It is further directed that the applicants shall not be relieved from their present place of posting in pursuance of the transfer order dated 01.10.2026 till the disposal of the representation by the respondents/competent authority. 5.2 Pending MAs, if any, also stand disposed of. 5.3 Parties shall bear their own costs.

(Pankaj Kumar)

Member (A)

Warij

Warij Yadav Digitally signed by Warij Yadav