Raju Kumar vs NORTH CENTRAL RAILWAY on 6 November 2026

O R D E R

By Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Joshi, Member (Judicial) :

Heard Shri Eshaan Chandra, learned counsel for the applicant and Shri Anil Kumar, learned counsel for the respondents.

2. The instant Original Application has been filed by the applicant under Section 19 of Administrative Tribunal, Act, 1985 for the following relief(s) :- “(i) Quash the impugned Transfer Order/ Office Order No. 08/2026 dated 23.10.2026 issued by the Respondents, in respect of the Applicant, and further direct the Respondents to allow the applicant to discharge this duty as Senior Section Officer /Travelling Inspector, Superintendent Jhansi and

Agra, SI Cell in the Office of Deputy FA & CAO (Traffic), North Central Railway, Traffic Accounts Office, Prayagraj.

(ii) Direct the Respondents to decide the pending Representations dated 26.10.2026 and 02.11.2026 before the Respondents.

(iii) To issue any other order or direction which this Hon'ble Tribunal may deem fit and proper.

(iv) To award costs to the applicant.”

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is challenging the Office Order No. 08/2026 dated 23.10.2026, whereby he has been transferred from S.I. Cell, Allahabad Headquarters, Prayagraj, to Banda Headquarters, Banda, on the post of Senior Section Officer/Travelling Inspector. He states that the impugned transfer is arbitrary, unjustified and contrary to the transfer guidelines issued by the Zonal Railway. He further submits that the transfer is neither an administrative transfer nor a rotational transfer, as prescribed under the Posting and Transfer Policy dated 17.09.2004. Referring to paragraphs 11.1 , 11.1(iv) (d) and 11.2 of the said policy, he submits that all TIAs are liable to be transferred from their existing headquarters to a new headquarters only after completion of three full tenures of four years each at the existing or paired headquarters, i.e., a maximum period of twelve years, subject to any reduction or extension of tenure by the administration. Therefore, the applicant's transfer before completion of the prescribed tenure is illegal and violation of the transfer guidelines.

4. Learned counsel for the applicant further submitted that the applicant has made a detailed representation dated 26.10.2026 and reminder dated 02.11.2026 for redressal of his grievance before the respondents but the same is still pending. He submits that a direction be given to the respondents to consider and decide the pending representation dated 26.10.2026 of the applicant by passing a reasoned and speaking order within a time bound manner.

5. Learned counsel for the respondents has opposed the prayer of the applicant but he has no objection to decide the representation.

6. However, in view of the limited prayer made by learned counsel for the applicant, no fruitful purpose will be served in keeping this O.A. pending. Accordingly, the OA is disposed of at the admission stage itself with direction to competent authority amongst the respondents to consider and decide the pending representation dated 26.10.2026 of the applicant by passing a reasoned and speaking order within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. The order so passed shall be communicated to the applicant without any delay. No order as to costs.

7. It is made clear that this Tribunal has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case.

8. All MAs pending in this O.A. also stand disposed off.

(Justice Rajiv Joshi)

Member(Judicial)

RKM/