SUJIT KUMAR vs EAST CENTRAL RAILWAY on 10 November 2026

O R D E R

KUMAR RAJESH CHANDRA :

The matter is taken up for stage. Shri M.P. Dixit, learne and Shri G.K. Agrawal, le Counsel, appearing on advan respondents, have been heard The applicant has approached order dated 06.11.2026 (Ann been transferred to Sonep Railway. Learned counsel for the app applicant has not, till date, s against the impugned trans departmental authority. He is requirement of exhausting remedy contemplated un Administrative Tribunals Act, that, having regard to the ci the apprehended personal proposed transfer, the app submit a representation to th a direction for its expeditious Learned counsel further pr during the pendency of such Additional Standing Counsel h the applicant submitting consideration by the compet with law. However, he has op any interim protection. We have considered the rival is evident from the applicant'

& Signal Engineer, East Central strict- Saran-841101 (Bihar) ……..Respondents al, ld. ASC (ORAL)

consideration at the notice ed counsel for the applicant, earned Additional Standing nce copy of the O.A. for the d. d this Tribunal challenging the nexure A/1), whereby he has ur Division of East Central plicant fairly submits that the submitted any representation fer order to the competent s, therefore, conscious of the the available departmental nder Section of the , 1985. However, he submits rcumstances of the case and hardship arising out of the licant may be permitted to he competent authority, with consideration. rays for interim protection h representation. The learned has expressed no objection to a representation and its tent authority in accordance pposed the prayer for grant of submissions. At the outset, it s own submission that he has l s

e , g e e s

e n t e l e s

e o h n d o s e f t s Digitally signed by MANORAN JAN KUMAR SINHA MANOR ANJAN KUMAR SINHA

6.

7.

8. approached this Tribunal wit the departmental remedy av of the Administrative Tribuna Tribunal shall not ordinarily a is satisfied that the applican remedies available under th redressal of his grievance. T ensure that the administrativ opportunity to examine and first instance. In the present case, the ap material before us, at demonstrating an exception issuance of notice to the res provisions of Section 20 of Act, 1985. The apprehen hardship, without supporting approaching the competent constitute sufficient justifi administration from exercisi whether the applicant's indiv any reconsideration of the tr appropriately be examined upon receipt of a represe dealing with the apprehen applicant has been asked to Sonepur, ECR for further impugned order Annexure decided so far. In view of the above, and hav own request, we consider it opportunity to submit a repr authority, setting out all relev within one week from this ord In the event, such representa stipulated period, the com Respondent No. 4, if compete and administrative orders, thout first availing himself of vailable to him. Section 20(1) ls Act, 1985 provides that the admit an application unless it nt has availed himself of the he relevant service rules for The provision is intended to ve authorities are afforded an address the grievance in the pplicant has not placed any this preliminary stage, nal circumstance warranting pondents in exception to the the Administrative Tribunals sion of possible personal g particulars and without first t authority, cannot by itself cation for restraining the ng its powers. The question vidual circumstances warrant ansfer is a matter which may by the competent authority entation. Moreover, we are nsion of the applicant. The report to the office of DRM posting/duties as per the A-1, which has not been ving regard to the applicant's appropriate to afford him an resentation to the competent vant facts and circumstances, der. ation is submitted within the mpetent authority, namely ent under the applicable rules or such other competent f ) e t e r o n e y , g e s l t f e n t y y e e e n s n t , e y s t Digitally signed by MANORAN JAN KUMAR SINHA MANOR ANJAN KUMAR SINHA

9.

10.

11. (Kuma Me

Mks authority as may be desig provisions, shall consider the reasoned and speaking ord applicable rules, administra within thirty days from th representation. It is clarified that the conside shall not be an empty formal shall take into account the g the applicant, including a hardship, while also keeping requirements and exigencie directed that the responden the representation if any su the applicant as stated in Par decision with regard to the t his present place of posting. . It is made clear that opinion on the legality or me order or on the merits of seeking its reconsideration. A consideration of the compete per applicable law/rules/proc . In view of the aforesai disposed of at the notice st order as to costs. ar Rajesh Chandra) (Justice ember (A)

nated under the applicable e same objectively and pass a der, in accordance with the ative instructions and law, he date of receipt of the eration of the representation lity. The competent authority grounds specifically raised by any substantiated personal g in view the administrative es of service. It is further t authorities will first decide ch representation is filed by ra 3 above, before taking any ransfer of the applicant from we have not expressed any erits of the impugned transfer the applicant's grounds for ll such issues are left open for ent/respondent authorities as cedure. d directions, the O.A. stands age itself. There shall be no e Narendra Kumar Johari) Member(J) e a e , e n y y l e r e y y m y r r r s s o Digitally signed by MANORAN JAN KUMAR SINHA MANOR ANJAN KUMAR SINHA