The Union of India and 5 Ors. Vs Sourav Ray

¶1

Page No.# 1/4

¶2

GAHC010004242026

¶3

2026:GAU-AS:5119-DB

¶4

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

¶5

Case No. : WP(C)/1989/2026

¶6

1.THE UNION OF INDIA AND 5 ORS

¶7

REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA MINISTRY OF DEFENCE SOUTH BLOCK NEW DELHI-110001

¶8

2: THE ENGINEER-IN-CHIEFS BRANCH MILITARY ENGINEER SERVICE DIRECTORATE GENERAL (PERSONNEL) KASHMIR HOUSE RAJAJI MARG NEW DELHI-110011

¶9

3: THE SUPERINTENDENT ENGINEER DIRECTORATE PERSONNEL (C AND M) ENGINEER-IN-CHIEF BRANCH KASHMIR HOUSE RAJAJI MARG NEW DELHI-110011

¶10

4: THE CHIEF ENGINEER HEADQUARTER EASTERN COMMAND FORT WILLIAM KOLKATA-70021

¶11

5: THE CHIEF ENGINEER (AF) SHILLONG ZONE ELEPHANT FALLS CAMP NONGLYER POST SHILLONG-793009

¶12

6: THE COMMANDER WORKS ENGINEER (AF) GUWAHATI BORJHAR C/O 99 APO GUWAHATI-78101

¶13

VERSUS

¶14

SOURAV RAY

¶15

S/O SRI SAMARESH RAY, JUNIOR ENGINEER, OFFICE OF THE COMMANDER WORKS ENGINNER (AIR FORCE), GUWAHATI, BORJHAR, C/O 99 APO, GUWAHATI- 781015

¶16

Page No.# 2/4

¶17

For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. S.K. Medhi, Central Government Counsel. For the Respondent(s) : Dr. GJ. Sharma, Advocate.

¶18

– B E F O R E –

¶19

HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. ASHUTOSH KUMAR HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN DEV CHOUDHURY

¶20

07.04.2026

¶21

(Ashutosh Kumar, CJ)

¶22

We have heard Mr. S.K. Medhi, learned Central Government Counsel for the petitioners and Dr. G.J. Sharma, learned Advocate for the sole respondent.

¶23

The petitioners/ Union of India & 5 Ors . have questioned the interim order dated 24.10.2025 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Guwahati Bench (hereinafter to be referred as “Tribunal”) in O.A. No.308/2025, whereby the promotion of the respondent to the higher post and his transfer to Shillong has been stayed.

¶24

The respondent is a Government Engineer, who had joined in service in the year 2013 as a Junior Engineer (Quality Surveying & Contracts) in the Military Engineering Service (MES). He was promoted to the higher post of Assistant Engineer and was posted at Shillong in the State of Meghalaya vide order dated 07.03.2025.

¶25

The promotion and posting, both were challenged by the respondent before the Tribunal at Guwahati vide O.A. No.236/2025.

¶26

The Tribunal, vide order dated 12.08.2025 passed in the aforenoted O.A., had directed the Department to reconsider the case of the

¶27

Page No.# 3/4

¶28

respondent and pass a fresh speaking order.

¶29

The speaking order, no doubt, was passed on 17.10.2025, rejecting the contentions of the respondent but also letting him know that as per the official Cadre Management Policy of 2015, the respondent could apply for transfer to a preferred place on personal ground but only after he physically serves at the new station for at least 6(six) months. On the same date of passing the speaking order, a fresh movement order was issued by the petitioners/ Department directing the respondent to report to Shillong.

¶30

This was again challenged by the respondent vide O.A. No.308/2025.

¶31

The contention of Mr. S.K. Medhi, learned Central Government Counsel is that within a week of filing of O.A. No.308/2025, the Tribunal passed the impugned interim order dated 24.10.2025, putting on hold both the earlier posting order dated 07.03.2025 along with the movement order dated 17.10.2025.

¶32

The grievance of the petitioners/Department is that no reasons have been recorded by the Tribunal while granting the stay.

¶33

Dr. G.J. Sharma, learned Advocate for the respondent, however, submits that uptil now, no written statement has been filed by the Department in the pending O.A. nor any application has been filed for vacating the stay order. The present writ petition has only been filed by the Department to obtain a cover for them against a contempt application pending before the Tribunal.

¶34

Page No.# 4/4

¶35

Without giving any opinion over the merits of the case, we record and accede to the submissions of Mr. Medhi, learned Central Government Counsel that within a period of 2(two) weeks from today, the written statement shall be filed before the Tribunal along with an application for vacating the stay of the promotion/posting and transfer order of the respondent.

¶36

If such Written Statement along with an application for vacating the stay is filed by the Department within the afore-noted period, the Tribunal shall look into the same and pass a final order or shall decide the application for vacating the stay in the first instance, but before initiating any contempt proceeding.

¶37

With the afore-noted request to the Tribunal, this writ petition stands disposed off.

¶38

JUDGE CHIEF JUSTICE

¶39

Comparing Assistant

The Union of India and 5 Ors. v. Sourav Ray

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The Union of India and 5 Ors. v. Sourav Ray

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Executive Director (Nef Zone), the Food Corporation of India and Anr. Vs the Union of India and 6 Ors.

Star Cement Vs Assam Power Distribution Company Limited

Dalmia Cement (North East) Ltd., Vs Assam Electricity Grid Corporation Ltd. and 3 Ors.

The Registrar of Co-Operative Societies, Vs Foyzul Hoque Mazumder and 10 Ors.

The Registrar of Co. Operative Societies and 2 Ors, Vs Foyzul Hoque Mazumder and 10 Ors.

Bharti Airtel Ltd. Vs the State of Assam and 2 Ors.