AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
K. Haripal, Member J
Applicant is working as Technician–III (Signal) in the office of the SSE Mangalore in Palakkad division of the Southern Railway. He started as a Helper in 2016. He is a native of Rajasthan. After completing the minimum residency period he applied for inter-Railway transfer to the Kota division of West Central Railway in Rajasthan. The application was duly forwarded following which No Objection Certificate, NOC for short, was issued by the 4th respondent, as evident from Annexure-A1. But the grievance of the applicant is that despite having approved the transfer both by the transferer and transferee Railways, he is not being relieved. On inter-Railway transfer he will have to forego all the promotions earned by him so far and also will have to join the transferee Railway in bottom seniority. Thus any delay in relieving him will cause him further miseries. So, challenging the non-feasance of the respondents 1 to 3 in not relieving him, he has approached this Tribunal seeking a direction to the respondents to relieve him at the earliest.
The respondents have opposed the prayer with the usual defence that the existing manpower situation does not permit them to relieve the applicant. According to them, Palakkad division is having the lowest staff strength on the signal side. The sanctioned strength of post is 236 against the required strength of 621. Moreover, introduction of new apparatus and signalling equipments have increased the work load of existing staff. The applicant belongs to safety category where shortage of Technicians is 41%. Detailed tabular statement also has been incorporated in the reply.
It is admitted that on his request, NOC was received in respect of the applicant on 11.10.2023, which is valid for six months. But standing instructions enable the respondents to keep the NOC valid till one year. The new RRB/RRC panel is under preparation. In the division there are nine employees working in the cadre of Assistants/Technicians who are waiting for transfer after receipt of NOC; eight such persons in the technical side are senior to the applicant. Out of the nine persons four have obtained NOC to Kota in West Central Railway. In other words, in the priority list the applicant is ninth and the position of the applicant seeking transfer to Kota is fourth.
The respondents further submitted that they have no intention to deny the request for transfer. But given the staff position, the request has only been withheld pending receipt of replacement RRB/RRC papers.
I heard Sri.Martin G Thottan, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri.Anil Prasad, learned Additional Central Government Standing Counsel.
The facts are not in dispute. On completion of the residency period the applicant submitted a request for one way inter-Railway transfer to Kota division of Western Central Railway. From the documents made available, it is certain that generally, the Railway is taking an attitude promoting such a one way/mutual inter-Railway transfers. But numerous checks are imposed. Annexure-A3 suggests that before forwarding any such request for inter-Railway transfers, the transferer Railway should ensure that there is reasonable possibility of relief in case of acceptance for transfer by the Railway to which transfer is sought. To put it in other words, when the request of the applicant was forwarded to the Western Central Railway, in all probability respondents 1 to 3 must have kept in mind the reasonable possibility of relieving the applicant in the event of receiving the NOC. After issue of NOC on 11.10.2023 in fact the respondents 1 to 3 are not heard to submit that they are unable to relieve the applicant or similarly placed employees for dearth of hands. Such a situation was created by the respondents 1 to 3 by forwarding his request and facilitated him to anticipate legitimate expectation for transfer.
The arguments of the respondents show that applicant being a Technician, on the introduction of new and sophisticated signalling equipments and machinery, in the precarious staff position, they are unable to relieve him for the present. In fact such a contingency should have been foreseen by the respondents before forwarding the request. There was no compulsion on the respondents to forward the request to the 4th respondent, if reasonable possibility of relief was remote. Once it was forwarded and obtained response in the nature of NOC from the transferee Railway, therefore, the respondents should have taken a decision within a reasonable period.
The learned Standing Counsel has submitted that papers have expected regarding new recruitment from RRB/RRC. Even when fresh recruitment is made, some margin at time has to be given for imparting training to the fresh hands. The stand of the respondents indicate that the division is being managed with the help of 236 employees on the signal side against the required strength of 621. Sanctioned strength is only 236. That means, the Railway finds it difficult to manage with the existing sanctioned strength.
It is only to be reiterated that the request of the applicant should have been forwarded after making a reasonable and pragmatic assessment of the staff position. Failure to make such an assessment, however, should not stand on the way of the functioning of the Railway, which is one of the important public sector undertakings. Therefore, interests of the general public also should be safeguarded.
It has also come out that nine employees are awaiting for transfer after getting NOC in the technical cadre, of which all the eight are above the applicant in the priority list. Similarly, four persons are seeking transfer to Kota itself. Despite all these facts the respondents cannot withhold the relief indefinitely. Having regard to the circumstances, therefore, O.A. is disposed of directing the respondents 1 to 3 to relieve the applicant within a period of nine months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. It goes without saying that, till then, the NOC will remain valid.
Original Application is disposed of as above. No costs.
(Dated this the 26th June, 2024)