om:11-cl-2024-Jan — Tenure fixed for NER in respect of routine transfer must be complied with. Non-availability of proper substitute is no excuse

Tenure fixed for NER in respect of routine transfer must be complied with. Non-availability of proper substitute is no excuse — This chunk discusses the judgment in the case of Shri Utsab Deb v. Secretary, Defence Research and Development Organization, Ministry of Defence and others, where the Applicant was granted a transfer... — Facts:The grievance of the Applicant in this OA is against non-posting to his choice place of posting. The Applicant joined DRDE, Gwalior as Senior Technical Assistant – A (Group ‘B' Technical/non-gazetted) on 5th October, 2004 and was later appointed as Scientist ‘B' (Group ‘A' Technical/Gazetted) through Limited Departmental Competitive Examination in the same Lab. Based on his request for compassionate transfer, he was posted in DRL, Tezpur and joined this Lab on 11th August, 2014. Later, vide his representation, dated 8-1-2018, he requested for posting him in any one of the Labs located at Gwalior / Mysore / New Delhi / Bangalore. This request has not been acceded to by the Respondent authorities on the ground of non-availability of suitable replacement in the present place of posting at Tezpur. Accordingly, in the previous O.A., order was passed in the previous O.A. No. 135 of 2021, rejecting the case of the Applicant for choice posting as prayed for in his representations, dated 8-1-2018 and 30-1-2019 vide Speaking Order No. DOP/05/53121/DLRL/M/02, dated 10th August, 2021 due to nonavailability of suitable Scientist to replace him. This has led to this present OA whereby the Applicant has sought the following relief(s):

“8.1 Impugned order for deputation transfer dated, 6-5-2021 be set aside and quashed so far the Applicant is concerned.

8.2 Impugned Order, dated 10-8-2021 be set aside and quashed.

8.3 The Hon'ble Tribunal be pleased to direct the Respondents to transfer the Applicant to his choice posting to Gwalior/Mysore/ New Delhi/Bangalore as per his representations, dated 8-1-2018 and 30-1-2019, to which he is entitled in terms of GOI OM, dated 14-12-1983 and 22-7-1998.

Pleadings were completed and the case was finally heard on 17-2-2022. Counsel for the Applicant specifically pointed out that as per the Office Memorandums of the Government of India, dated 14-12-1983 and 22-7-1998, the Applicant is entitled for posting in any of the choice stations after completion of 2/3 years, as the case may be in N.E.R. etc. The Applicant had applied for any one of the four stations as stated above. The Applicant also challenged the ground of the rejection by the Respondent authorities as no substitute is available to replace him. This argument of non-availability of substitute is not maintainable for the simple fact that one day; the Applicant would eventually retire or in any event may occur to him. In such situation, there has to be some administrative arrangement to post suitable substitution in his place. The Additional CGSC appearing on behalf of the Respondents was specifically asked as whether the Applicant is covered by the Office Memorandums of the Government of India, dated 14-12-1983 and 22-7-1998 for repatriation to any of the choice stations after completion of tenure in N.E.R. etc. He was not able to confirm whether the Applicant is covered by these policies. Counsel for Applicant submitted that the Applicant's case is very much covered by the Office Memorandums issued by the Government of India, dated 14-12-1983 and 22-7-1998 and the Applicant has already completed more than 7 years in the N.E. Region.