TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (5) TMI 1849
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... MEMBER (J): The instant Original Application has been filed by the applicant under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 praying for the following reliefs: "8.1 To quash and set aside the impugned establishment order No. 50/2023 dated 28.06.2023 [Annexure- A/1] with all consequential benefits. 8.2 To quash and declare the impugned circular dated 20.09.2018 [Annexure- A/2] to be unconstitutional and ultra-vires the Constitution of India to the extent that it was sought to be implemented with retrospective effect from 26.12.2016 with all consequential benefits. 8.3 To direct the respondents to allow the applicants to continue in Shillong Zone with benefits of their respective seniority, promotion ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....lation that the officers would remain on load basis in the transferred cadre from 26.12.2016 till 31.03.2019 and thereafter reverted back. 4. The attempt made by the respondents to discontinue ICT as well as the Circular dated 20.09.2018 was challenged before the CAT, Kerala Bench on the ground of discrimination in as much as the respondents totally overlooked the various DOPT OM on spouse posting, disabled person, compassionate posting etc. The CAT, Kerala Bench upheld the challenge and the respondents approached the Hon'ble Kerala High Court. The Hon'ble Kerala High Court overturned the decision of the Hon'ble CAT, Kerala Bench by holding that the non-inclusion of ICT in the Rules of 2016 means that ICT is not permissible. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... in gross violation of principles of natural justice as no opportunity of hearing was given to the applicants. Further, the impugned circular dated 20.09.2018 is unconstitutional and ultra-vires the constitution because the respondents by giving retrospective effect to the circular curtailed the vested accrued rights of the applicants. The applicants are now officers of Shillong Zone after their absorption on transfer under ICT losing seniority and their seniority is cemented in Shillong Zone followed by their avenue of promotion. Therefore, reverting to original zone will certainly amount to altering the condition of service of applicants. 7. Respondents filed written statement and stated that the issue of Inter Commissionerate Transfer....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....AT, Guwahati Bench was transferred to the CAT, Principal Bench, Delhi and renewed as Ο.Α. No. 3223/2019at the request of the Applicants. However, said OA was dismissed in default on the grounds of non-prosecution on 15.12.2022 by the CAT, Principal Bench, Delhi and the Department issued EO 50/2023 dated 28.06.2023 duly repatriating them to their parent Commissionerate. Thereafter, 5 applicants filed another OA No. 173/2023 before the CAT, Guwahati Bench challenging the EO 50/2023 dated 28.06.2023 on the ground that:- The Hon'ble Apex Court did not decide as to what will happen to those officers, who were already transferred under ICT long back, The issue of retrospectivity of the impugned circular dated 2....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... in accordance with the cited Board's Circular. In that view of the matter, the OA No. 173/2023 is liable to be dismissed as well as the ground of Principles of res-judicata too since the earlier O.A. No. 100 of 2019 renewed as O.A. No. 3223/2019 was dismissed for non-prosecution. 11. By filing rejoinder, applicants state that the respondents only comply the one part of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court but not the subsequent part. The respondent authorities did not heed to the important observation made by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. Therefore, the action of the respondents is arbitrary, unfair and unjustified. As per the applicant, impugned Circular dated 20.09.2018 is unconstitutional and ultra-vires to the Constitution to ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....y of 2011 and thereafter, the new policy which was superseded by policy dated 20.09.2018 in the public interest and he was sent back to the original post. It is the prerogative of an employer to transfer and make the policy in the interest of general public and they can transfer any person anywhere in the exigency of the service. So no right is accrued in favour of the applicants because there is not discrimination. If the policy is made, that is for the entire employee in the department. There is nothing against any person and the applicants also failed to prove any discrimination caused to him. It is not the prerogative of the employee that he should be posted at his own choice place. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Mrs. Shilpi B....