Smt Anupama Samantray vs DEPTT OF POSTS on 2 November 2026

CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL CUTTACK Order Sheet Item no.: 16 O.A./80/2026 (CUTTACK) [ TRANSFER ] Court No.: 1 No of Adjournment: 11 Order Dated: 02/11/2026 SMT ANUPAMA SAMANTRAY Vs DEPTT OF POSTS

For Applicant(s) Advocate : N.R. ROUTRAY

For Respondent(s) Advocate : R.S PATNAIK Order of The Tribunal Heard. Perused the records.

2. In this OA, the applicant challenges her posting, on reinstatement, to Takera BO under Daspalla SO without any depletion of TRCA vide order dated 10.09.2025 and the letter dated 08.10.2025 and 30.01.2026 rejecting her representation against such order dated 10.09.2025.

3. According to the respondents, the applicant, while continuing as GDS BPM, Jagannathprasad BO in account with Khandaparagarh SO, she was placed under off duty in exercise of power under Sub Rule 1 of rule 12 of Department of Posts, Gramin Dak Sevaks (Conduct and Engagement) Rules 2020. Disciplinary proceedings under Rule 10(B) [Major Penalty] of Rules, 2020 were initiated against her vide memorandum dated 24.01.2025. While the matter stood thus, vide order dated 10.09.2025, she was reinstated/transferred and posted in her present capacity as GDS BPM to/at Tekara BO without any depletion of her TRCA on vigilance angle. Since disciplinary proceedings were initiated against her on serious allegations of omission and commission while she was continuing as GDS BPM of Jagannathprasad BO on vigilance angle keeping in mind the OM of Govt. of India, Ministry of Communications, Department of Pozts, New Delhi dated 21.10.2019.It is averred that representation submitted by her against such transfer was duly considered but the same was rejected. Therefore, there being no injustice caused in the decision making process of the matter, this OA is liable to be dismissed.

4. In course of hearing, Ld. Counsel for the applicant boils down his argument, to what has been stated in the rejoinder, to the effect that applicant’s daughter is going to appear Board Examination in February-March, 2027. The applicant has been transferred to a distance of 63 Kms from her present place of posting. Therefore, in the event of materialization of the order of transfer, the education career of her daughter will be serious jeopardized. This apart, according to him, There are 21 SO, including Sunakhala, under Nayagarh HO. As per information, at Surukabadi BO, which is near about 10 kms from the present working place of the applicant, out of three, one post of ED BPM is lying vacant. Further, as per his information, a number of posts under Sunakhala and Itamati SO are also laying vacant against which the applicant can be posted, but, in spite of existing vacancies and other anticipated vacancies, applicant being a lady worker, taking her inconvenience to work at such a distance place, her transfer and posting needs favourable consideration to any nearby place. This submission has been opposed by the Ld. Counsel for the respondents by stating that he does not have any information about the vacancy positions, however, be that as it may, it is for the authorities to decide how far posting of the applicant in nearby places if at all vacancy do exist but the applicant did not make such prayer before the authority by way of representation. Therefore, no such direction can be issued by this Bench.

5. Considered the submissions of the parties. I find that the transfer/posting upon reinstatement cannot be found faulted with because in the OM dated 21.10.2019, discretion is vested with the authorities to transfer and post any of the GDS employees to any other place other than his place of posting where omission and commission were alleged. However, the education of her children needs sympathetic consideration and, in the instant case, it is not in dispute that her daughter will appear the Board Examination in February-March, 2027. The applicant also states that she has no objection to be posted in any nearby place instead of the place where she has been posted vide order impugned in this OA. In the premises stated above, liberty is given to the applicant to make an exhaustive representation to the competent authority within a period of seven days and the competent authority shall consider and pas appropriate order thereon within a period of 15 days therefrom and till such time she shall not be disturbed from her present place of posting.

6. In the result, the OA stands disposed of. No costs. Pramod Kumar Das Member (A) Kalpeswar Behera

( ps )