Srinagar, Oct 27: Underscoring that administrative decisions must take into account relevant circumstances including the case of an employee nearing superannuation, the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) has directed the Government to reconsider the transfer of a 59-year-old Cooperative Department employee who is due to retire within a year.
A bench of Judicial Member, M S Latif, however, declined to interfere with the transfers of four other employees, while dealing with their plea seeking intervention for retention of their transfers.
The five employees had petitioned, challenging a government order dated October 1, 2026 whereby they were transferred from Kashmir Division to Jammu Division.
They had sought their retention or adjustment against available posts of Assistant Registrars (Cooperative) or equivalent posts in Kashmir Division, citing a departmental proposal and availability of vacancies.
The Tribunal reiterated that courts ordinarily have limited scope to interfere in transfer matters. While the Tribunal held that transfer is an exigency of service and an employee has no vested right to remain posted at a particular place, it said that administrative decisions must take into account relevant circumstances, including the case of an employee nearing superannuation.
The Tribunal noted that the applicants had been placed as In-charge Assistant Registrars or Auditors in June 2026 and subsequently transferred under the impugned order. The Government, however, maintained that the post of Assistant Registrar was a UT-cadre post under SRO-663 of 2019 and carried transfer liability across Jammu and Kashmir.
The authorities contended that the arrived employees had served in Kashmir Division for prolonged periods ranging from three to eight years and that their transfer was necessitated by administrative requirements and operational deficiencies in Jammu Division. Moreover 55 vacancies existed in Kashmir Division and 39 in Jammu Division, they said.
With regard to Shahzada Amiq Hussain, 59, one of the petitioners, the Tribunal observed that he was due to superannuate within a year and would need to prepare his pension papers.
Taking note of the authorities’ own stand that two other officials nearing retirement had been retained near their hometowns, the Tribunal said the case of Hussain warranted consideration.
It directed the competent authority to reconsider his case and pass an appropriate order within two weeks “positively”.
The Tribunal found no merit in their case of other four applicants, saying there was no sufficient ground to interfere with their postings.
About The Author
