Panchu Pradhan vs DEPARTMENT OF POSTS on 9 November 2026

O R D E R

Mr.Sudhi Ranjan Mishra, Member, J.M.

The applicant challenging the order dated 22.10.2024 of Respondent No. 3 cancelling the transfer order issued under Rule 39 of Postal Manual Vol IV by the Respondent No. 2 without any authority or jurisdiction and without affording opportunity of hearing to the applicant has filed this OA praying for following reliefs: a) To allow the Original Application with cost. b) To quash the letter dtd. 22.10.2024 under Annexure A/6 after declaring the same as illegal. c) To direct the respondents to implement the order dtd. 13.06.2023 under Annexeure A/1 in enabling the applicant to join at Nayagarh Division. d) Pass any other order/orders as would be deemed just and proper.

2. The fact of the case as inter alia averred stated by the applicant in the OA is as follows:

Kalpeswar Behera

2.1 That, the brief facts in nut shell is that, the Applicant while working as GDS MC Mariwada B.O. in account with Malkanagiri MDG appeared the limited Departmental competitive examination for the post of postman and qualified in the said examination and posted as postman at Gunupur SO. While working as such the applicant submitted an online application for intra-Circle transfer under provisions of Rule-38 of Postal Manual Volume-IV from Rayagada Division to Nayagarh Division. 2.2: That, the competent authority was pleased to allow the application of the applicant and allotted him to Nayagarh Division with terms and condition as indicated therein. That, it may be noted here that pursuant to Order dtd.13.06.2023, the Superintendent of Post offices directed the applicant to submit the terminal illness certificate as applicable to this office within 03 days of receipt of the letter. Applicant submitted the same before the Respondent No.3.That, thereafter the applicant preferred an representation before Respondent No.4 with prayer for issuance of place of posting under Rule-38 transfer. The Respondent No.4 vide letter dtd.10.01.2024 intimated the applicant that his office has already issued letter to the SPOs, Rayagada Division for disposal of the case of applicant.

Kalpeswar Behera

2.3 That, while no action was taken by the Respondents, on 14.03.2024 the applicant preferred another application addressed to Respondent No.4 with prayer to issue order regarding place of posting. That, it may be noted here that the Respondent No.4 vide letter dtd.01.04.2024 intimated that his office has already issued letter to SPOS Rayagada Division for disposal of his case. Further, CO Bhubaneswar vide letter No.ST/45-Rule-38/PA/SA/2023 dated 26.12.2023 and RO, Berhampur vide letter No.ST/11-05/2022 dated 24.01.2024 have instructed the SPOs, Rayagada Division to submit a detailed report regarding this and issue clarification on same for further necessary action. But the reply is yet to be received from SPOs, Rayagada Division on the matter. That, the Respondent No.3 vide letter dtd.22.10.2024 intimated the applicant that the applicant has applied for transfer under Rule-38 of Postal manual Vol-IV in contravention of extant Rules, as such his transfer to Nayagarh Division under Rule -38 hereby stands cancelled.

2.4. That, it is submitted that the letter dtd.22.10.2024 in cancelling the intra-Circle transfer of the applicant under Rule-38

Kalpeswar Behera is no nest in the eyes of law as the Respondent No.3 lacks authority/jurisdiction for such letter. It is extremely important to submit here that the Respondent No.2 after due verification approved the intra Circle transfer of the applicant and the Respondent No.3 being the subordinate, he ought to have implement the Order of his higher authority. However, the Respondent No.3 cancelled the Order of transfer issued by Respondent No.2.That, it is submitted that though the Order of intra Circle transfer was issued on 13.06.2024, the Respondent No.3 cancelled the said Order of transfer in respect of the applicant after about 1 year and 4 months. It is needless to indicate here that the Respondent No.3 without questioning the validity Order of Respondent No.2 should have implemented the Order. However, the reason for cancellation of Order of Respondent No.2 is best known to the Respondent No.3. 2.5 That, parents of the applicant are suffering from paralysis and other old age ailments. As such, they are bed ridden and needs proper care for survival. For which the applicant preferred Rule-38 transfer application being the only male member to look after his parents. Respondent No.2 was pleased to consider the case of the applicant with extant of Rules and approved his

Kalpeswar Behera transfer Further, the applicant has rendered his entire service period in remote areas and has no hesitation to work at any corner of the Circle. But due to the ill health condition of his parents, he opted Rule-38 transfer to Nayagarh Division. That, prior to cancellation of the Order of transfer of the applicant, the Respondent No.3 has not afforded any opportunity of hearing to the applicant, which is clear violation of principle of natural justice. That, in such view of facts and circumstances the act of the Respondent No.3 in cancelling the Rule-38 transfer of the applicant is without authority and non est in the eyes of law and liable to be quashed.

3. The respondents have filed their counter stating as follows: 3.1 That, the Applicant had applied for intra-circle transfer under Rule-38 of Postal Manual Vol-IV from Rayagada Postal Division to Nayagarh Postal Division availing special provision of 'ILLNESS' grounds on 10.03.2023. As per Postal Directorate letter No. X-12/6/2021-SPN-II dated 03.02.2023 (Annexure-R/1), Employee/ his dependent family members suffering from Terminal Illness (Employee need to submit Certificate issued by Civil Surgeon of District certifying that the employee/ dependent

Kalpeswar Behera family member is suffering from terminal illness, without which case of employee shall not be considered under this category). The application was erroneously accepted on online portal as the Applicant has not submitted any certificate issued by Civil Surgeon of the District or any other such certificate proving his/ or hís dependent family members terminal illness. The CPMG, Odisha Circle, based on the acceptance made by Rayagada Postal Division passed the order dated 13.06.2023 (Annexure-A/1) for transfer from Rayagada Division to Nayagarh Division under Odisha Postal Circle. The mistake of erroneously verifying Applicants transfer application brought up to light only after receipt 17.08.2023 from Respondent No.4 wherein it was mentioned that the Applicants application has been approved even without completion of one year in PA cadre. On receipt of email dated 17.08.2023, the Respondent No. 03 asked the Applicant to submit the terminal Illness certificate as applicable to Division Office Rayagada within 03 days of receipt of the letter dated 01.09.2023 (Annexure-A/2). The respondent submitted certificates belonging to two members of his family, out of which one from a Registered Medical Practitioner's letter head and second was a report issued by Balaji Diagnostic Centre whose

Kalpeswar Behera copy submitted by the Applicant was too dark to be legible. Thereafter, the Applicant was further asked to submit attested copies of medical certificate enclosed at the time of applying for Rule-38 transfer (Annexure R/2).It is to mention that the Respondent No. 3 erroneously approved the Applicant's Rule-38 transfer application. When asked to the Applicant to submit the required certificate of terminal illness, he was not able to produce the same. Subsequently, the Respondent No. 03 cancelled the transfer of the Applicant from Rayagada Division to Nayagarh Division as the Applicant had applied for transfer under Rule-38 of Postal Manual Vol-VI in contravention of extant rules (Annexure R/1). 2.2 It is humbly submitted that the facts stated in this para is strongly denied. The Applicant had submitted a fresh application for transfer under Rule- 38 on 10.03.2023 availing special provision of ILLNESS grounds, after his promotion to the cadre of Postal Assistant (Annexure R/3). It is humbly submitted that the averments made in this Para need no comments since the same is based on the records. However, anything contrary to the records is specifically denied.

Kalpeswar Behera

2.3 It is humbly submitted that the averments made in this Para need no comments since the same is based on the records. However, it is to mention that the applicant has submitted illegible copies of documents of two of his family members. One of the certificate has been made after the Respondent No. 03 asked the Applicant to prove the terminal Illness. Further, the Applicant was asked to submit attested copies of medical certificate enclosed at the time of applying for Rule-38 transfer. The applicant never submitted terminal illness certificate to this office as requested vide SPOs, Rayagada Division letter No B/G- 3/RGDA/Ch-I dated 14.09.2023 (Annexure-R/2). 2.4 It is humbly submitted that the averments made in this Para need no comments since the same is based on the records. However, anything contrary to the records is specifically denied. The applicant has overlooked the letter sent to him on 14.09.2023 and did not submit certificate of Terminal Illness. The applicant however, kept writing to Respondent No.4 whereas Respondent No.4, has requested the Applicant to submit applications through proper channel and write through Respondent No.03 which the applicant never paid any heed. It is humbly submitted that the correspondence between

Kalpeswar Behera

Respondents were made after going through records and official formalities. The Respondent No. 3 made correspondence to RO, Berhampur on 04.10.2024 (Annexure R/4). 2.5 It is to humbly submit that the Rule-38 transfers was applied online which is an automated portal and works on the information provided and approved by the Postal Divisions. The approved information from all the Postal Divisions KARISE.PY under respective Postal Circles consolidates and transfer gets approved if vacancy is available in other Postal Divisions. Since, the Respondent No. 03 erroneously approved the transfer application of the Applicant before completion of one year of minimum service, the details of the Applicant was uploaded and approved on the portal automatically and allotted Nayagarh Division. When, the mistake was discovered the transfer orders of the applicant was cancelled via online portal itself. 2.6 It is humbly submitted that the Applicant was requested vide annexure A/2 and R/2 to submit proof of Terminal Illness certificate based on which the Applicant applied for the said transfer. Here it is to mention, that the Applicant at first used his bad intention with the department by hiding the fact that he/ his

Kalpeswar Behera family members are terminally ill. He used mere a prescription of a local medical practitioner and filled his application availing benefits of terminal illness. It is also to be submitted that if the Applicant will be given chance based on false Certificates, it would be an injustice to numerous employees of the Department of Posts who were in actual need of transfers based on Terminal Illness with genuine certificates and reasons. Hence, the Application of Applicant was cancelled based on non-submission of records by the Applicant. 2.7 If the parents of the Applicants are suffering from paralysis and other old age ailments, He should get it certified by a civil surgeon as per instructions laid down in point (xi) (c) of Rule-38 of Postal Manual Vol-IV attached as Annexure R/1 and reapply the application afresh. The applicant was given opportunities to submit Illness certificate by the Respondent No. 3 which are attached as Annexure A/2 and R/2.It is humbly submitted that the cancellation order issued by Respondent No. 03 is justified. Hence the O.A. may be quashed and the cancellation order may be upheld and declared legal or may pass any other order/orders as would be deemed just and proper.

Kalpeswar Behera

4. The applicant has filed rejoinder and the respondents have filed reply to the same reiterating the stand taken by them in the OA and counter.

5. Heard both sides and perused the records.

6. The main issue to be decided in this OA is whether a transfer order issued by competent authority can be modified or cancelled by a subordinate authority.

7. It is a trite position that any order issued by a competent authority cannot be cancelled, modified, or stayed by a subordinate authority unless specific powers or delegation have been expressly granted by the competent authority or service rules. A subordinate officer or authority derives their administrative power from the superior or competent authority. An order passed by a superior/competent authority holds higher weight and binding force. A lower authority cannot override, alter, or nullify an order issued by an authority higher in the administrative hierarchy.

8. Even though the respondents have submitted that the transfer order was cancelled by competent authority i.e. CPMG, Bhubaneswar, no documents to that effect has been filed. In

Kalpeswar Behera view of the above position, the impugned order is quashed and set aside. The matter is remitted back to the competent authority to consider the case of the applicant as per rules and pass a speaking order to be communicated to the applicant within a period of 60 days from date of receipt of copy of this order.

9. The OA stands disposed of accordingly. Pending MA’s, if any, stands disposed of. No costs.

(PRAMOD KUMAR DAS) (SUDHI RANJAN MISHRA) MEMBER (A) MEMBER (J)

Kalpeswar Behera