Disposed

Sreeraj B Kartha v. Union of India

Kerala HC13 Nov 2020OP (CAT)/203/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a petition challenging a transfer order relieving the petitioner from duties at Trissur and directing him to Minicoy. The Court refused to interfere, noting transfers are generally not subject to interference absent fundamental right violations. The petitioner's representation was directed to be considered during the finalization of transfers.

What did the court decide?

The petitioner's petition was disposed of; the competent authority is directed to consider the petitioner's representation while finalizing annual general transfers.

Sreeraj B Kartha Vs Union of India — Service and Employment | Kerala HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.M.SHAFFIQUE

¶4

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P.

¶6

FRIDAY, THE 13TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2020 / 22ND KARTHIKA, 1942

¶7

OP (CAT).No.203 OF 2020

¶8

AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN OA 404/2020 OF CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL,ERNAKULAM BENCH

¶9

PETITIONER:

¶10

SREERAJ B KARTHA AGED 34 YEARS S/O K P BALACHANDRAN KARTHA, ASSISTANT CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE OFFICER-1/G (PIS NO.130717), THRISSUR UNIT, (RESIDING AT 21, KSHB COLONY, BEHIND WORKING WOMENS HOSTEL, PULLAZHI, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN680012.

¶11

BY ADVS. SRI.T.SANJAY SHRI.SANIL KUMAR G. SHRI.MIDHUN R.

¶12

RESPONDENTS:

¶13

1 UNION OF INDIA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, GOVT OF INDIA MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS, NORTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI-110001.

¶14

2 THE JOINT DIRECTOR SUBSIDIARY INTELLIGENCE BUREAU (SIB)- TRIVANDRUM, MHA, GOVT OF INDIA, 572 MOUNT FORT HOUSE, THYCADU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695014.

¶15

3 THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR SUBSIDIARY INTELLIGENCE BUREAU (SIB)- TRIVANDRUM, MHA, GOVT OF INDIA, 572 MOUNT FORT HOUSE, THYCADU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695014.

¶16

4 THE JOINT DEPUTY DIRECTOR/E SUBSIDIARY INTELLIGENCE BUREAU (SIB)- TRIVANDRUM, MHA, GOVT OF INDIA, 572 MOUNT FORT HOUSE, THYCADU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695014.

¶17

O.P.(CAT)No.203/2020

¶18

¶19

5 THE DIRECTOR INTELLIGENCE BUREAU (HEAD OF DEPARTMENT), IB HEADQUARTERS, NORTH BLOCK, MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS, NEW DELHI-110001.

¶20

SRI.P. VIJAYAKUMAR - ASG.

¶21

THIS OP (CAT) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13.11.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

O.P.(CAT)No.203/2020

JUDGMENT

Dated this the 13th day of November 2020

¶26

Shafffique,J.

¶27

The petitioner had approached this Court inter alia challenging Ext.P3 order dated 15.10.2020 of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Ernakulam. The petitioner is the applicant in the Original Application. He sought to set aside Annexure-A4 by which he was relieved from his duties while he was working at Trissur and he was directed to join at Minicoy Lakshadweep. That apart, he sought for a direction that the transfer to the Minicoy and Lakshadweep island should be reconsidered. The Tribunal after considering the matter dismissed the application.

¶28

While impugning the aforesaid order of the Tribunal, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner had given Ext.P5 representation to the Director. That apart, as per Ext.P6 order dated 7.9.2020, annual general transfers are to be finalised and choices of stations have been sought from all the officers. The petitioner had already given his choice and the transfers are to be finalised on or before 30.11.2020. Insofar as the issue involved is only transfer of an officer, there was justification on the part of the Tribunal for not having interfered in the matter. It is trite that the Court or Tribunal shall not

¶29

O.P.(CAT)No.203/2020

¶30

¶31

interfere with the orders of transfer, which is part of service conditions, unless any fundamental right of the petitioner is violated or there is malafides in the action of the appointing authority. The petitioner was unable to prove any such fact and therefore, we do not think it necessary to interfere with the orders of transfer. However, since the petitioner had already submitted Ext.P5 representation and had given his place of choice, the competent authority shall consider his representation while considering general transfers in terms of Ext.P6.

¶32

With the above observation, the original petition is disposed of.

Sd/-

A.M.SHAFFIQUE

JUDGE

Sd/-

GOPINATH P.

JUDGE

acd

O.P.(CAT)No.203/2020

APPENDIX

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶44

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF OA NO.404/2020 DATED 24/08/2020.

¶45

ANNEXURE A4 COPY OF ORDER DATED 20.08.2020 ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT RELIEVING THE APPLICANT FROM DUTIES AT TRISSUR UNIT AND DIRECTING HIM TO REPORT AT MINICOY, LAKSHAEWEEP ALONG WITH ITS RETYPED COPY. ANNEXURE A1 COPY OF ORIGINAL APPLICATION NUMBER 180/00208/2020 ALONG WITH ANNEXURES. ANNEXURE A2 COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 05.06.2020 PASSED IN APPLICATION NUMBER 180/00208/2020 ANNEXURE A3 COPY OF OFFICE MEMORANDUM DATED 17/07/2020 ISSUED AS PER THE DIRECTIONS OF THE DIRECTOR OF INTELLIGENCE, NEW DELHI ALONG WITH ITS RETYPED COPY. EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF REPLY STATEMENT DATED 23/09/2020. EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF ORDER DATED 15.10.2020 IN OA NO.404 OF 2020.

¶46

EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF COMMENDATION CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE DIRECTOR IB(N/DELHI). EXHIBIT P4(a) TRUE COPY OF COMMENDATION CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE ADDL DIRECTOR SIB (N/DELHI) EXHIBIT P4 (b) TRUE COPY OF COMMENDATION CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE JOINT DIRECTOR SIB (N/DELHI) EXHIBIT P4(c) TRUE COPY OF THE APPRECIATION CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE FRRO COCHIN. EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATION DATED

¶47

O.P.(CAT)No.203/2020

¶48

¶49

28/1082020 SENT TO THE DIRECTOR IB.

¶50

EXHIBIT P6 PHOTO COPY OF AGT GUIDELINES DATED 07/09/2020.

Sreeraj B Kartha v. Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sreeraj B Kartha v. Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

The Deputy Director of Education Vs John Justin Rajamani

Sheela.a. Vs State of Kerala

Thomas K.J., Vs Andrews Prabhu

Union of India, Vs Shymon S.

Ms. Fatima Kader Vs the State of Kerala

Ann Sonny, Vs the Commissioner for Entrance Examinations