Central Administrative Tribunal
Ashok Ruhil vs DEFENCE on 27 October 2026
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI
OA No. 4237/2026
This the 27th Day of October, 2026
Hon’ble Ms. Harvinder Kaur Oberoi, Member (J)
Hon’ble Dr. Sumeet Jerath, Member (A)
Ashok Ruhil,
P. No. 23524797H (TDN/MATE),
Age: 40 years,
C/o Rai Singh,
Near Azad Sarpanch House,
Dahkora, Jhajjar, Haryana – 131402.
.…Applicant
(By Advocate : Mr. Anoop Kumar)
VERSUS
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. Union of India, Through its Secretary, Ministry of Defence, South Block, New Delhi – 110011.
2. Director General of Ordnance Services (DGOS), Integrated Headquarters, Ministry of Defence (Army), ‘B’ Wing, Sena Bhawan, New Delhi – 110011.
3. Officer-in-Charge, AOC Records, Secunderabad, PIN – 900453, C/o 56 APO.
4. The Commandant, Central Vehicle Depot, Central Ordnance Depot, Delhi Cantt. – 10. .... RESPONDENTS
[By Advocate :Mr. Manish Kumar]
ARTI
ARTI
ORDER (ORAL)
Hon’ble Ms. Harvinder Kaur Oberoi, Member (J)
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is aggrieved of the transferred order to a high-altitude station. He submits that the applicant was earlier serving at a station in Naval Dockyard and was transferred to the CVD Delhi Cantt in the year 2011 on account of his mother's illness.
2. Learned counsel further submits that the applicant's mother is dependent upon him and is under his care. He also submits that the applicant is suffering from asthma and has been medically advised to avoid posting at high-altitude stations.
3. It is further submitted that the applicant submitted a representation in October 2026 against the impugned transfer order, which was forwarded by the Controlling Officer to the competent authority for consideration. However, the said representation is still pending consideration.
4. In view of the above, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the matter, we deem it appropriate to direct the respondents to consider and decide the applicant's pending representation by passing a reasoned and speaking order within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
5. The respondents shall take a decision on the representation expeditiously. In the meantime, the respondents shall maintain the status quo with regard to the applicant's transfer, to enable them to consider the matter in accordance with law.
ARTI
ARTI
6. In view of the above, the present OA stand disposed of. No order as to costs.
(Dr. Sumeet Jerath) (Harvinder Kaur Oberoi) Member (A) Member (J)
/arti/
ARTI
ARTI