IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR MONDAY, THE 3RD AUGUST 2009 / 12TH SRAVANA 1931 WP(C).No. 21812 of 2009(S) ----------------- -------------------------- OA.258/2009 of CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL,ERNAKULAM BENCH .................... PETITIONER(S)/RESPONDENTS 1 AND 2: ------------------------ 1. THE DEPUTY GENERAL MANAGER (A & OP), OFFICE OF THE PRINCIPAL GENERAL MANAGER, TELECOM, BSNL, BSNL BHAVAN, KALATHIPARAMBIL ROAD, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI-682 016. 2. THE ASSISTANT GENERAL MANAGER (ADMN), OFFICE OF THE PRINCIPAL GENERAL MANAGER, TELECOM, BSNL, BSNL BHAVAN, KALATHIPARAMBIL ROAD, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI-682 016. BY ADV. SRI.K.RAMAKUMAR, SENIOR ADVOCATE ADV. SRI.T.RAMPRASAD UNNI & ADV. SRI.J.R.PREM NAVAZ RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------ 1. THE HON'BLE CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, ERNAKULAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR. 2. S.P.MOHANKUMAR, TELEPHONE SUPERVISOR (OPERATIVE), CUSTOMER SERVICE CENTRE, BSNL PERUMBAVOOR, RESIDING AT "USHAS", PATTAL, IRINGOL P.O., PERUMBAVOOR-683 548. 3. P.J.XAVIER, SECTION SUPERVISOR (OPERATIVE), AOTR III SECTION, OFFICE OF THE PGMT, BSNL, CATHOLIC CENTRE, KOCHI-682 031, RESIDING AT C.R.5 P &T QUARTERS, THEVARA, KOCHI-682 013. 4. BIJUMON M.P., SENIOR TELECOM OPERATIVE ASSISTANT, OFFICE OF THE AO TR-VAS, CATHOLIC CENTRE, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI-682 031, RESIDING AT MUTTATH HOUSE, SOUTH PARAVOOR P.O., 682 320. BY ASST. SOLICITOR GENERAL SRI. P. PARAMESWARAN NAIR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03/08/2009, ALONGWITH WPC NO.21868/09 THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K. BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & C.T. RAVIKUMAR, JJ. ------------------------------ W.P.(C) Nos.21812 and 21868 of 2009 S ------------------------------ Dated this, the 3rd day of August, 2009 JUDGMENT Balakrishnan Nair, J. These writ petitions are filed against the common order passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Ernakulam Bench in O.A.Nos.258/09 and 264/09 respectively. Those Original Applications were heard and disposed of along with O.A.No.272/09. The applicants in those two cases challenged their transfer under Annexure A6 order dated 24.4.2009 produced along with Ext.P1 Original Application in W.P.(C) No.21812/09, by which they were transferred to different places. The transfer was attacked on various grounds. The writ petitioners supported the said order. The Tribunal after hearing both sides disposed of the above Original Applications along with the connected Original Application with the following directions: “Considering the above facts, this Tribunal is of the considered view that transfer of Shri K.A.Babu, has to be held as arbitrary, accordingly his transfer is struck down. As regards others, WP(C) No.21812 & 21868 of 2009 - 2 - Respondent No.1 shall within a period of 4 weeks from the date of communication of this order, analyze the reasons for retaining many juniors without granting exemptions and if there are justifications, for such retention of these juniors, the same shall be spelt out in a speaking order and a copy of the same shall be made available to all other applicants. Even if there is any grievance thereafter, such applicants shall have to join duty in the new place of posting and make due representation as held in the case of Gujarat Electricity Board Vs. Atmaram Sangomal Pashani (1969) 2 SCC 602. In the event of such representations being field (sic. 'filed'), the same shall be considered by the respondents and decision communicated. Till such time, the contrast is considered by the Respondent No.1 with reference to juniors not exempted specifically, as stated above, within 4 weeks, the applicants shall not be transferred.”. We notice that the petitioners were substantially prejudiced only by the direction issued in O.A.No.272 of 2009. We have already admitted W.P.(C) No.21853 of 2009 filed against the order in that O.A.. In the case of contesting respondents herein, the only direction is to consider their representations within four WP(C) No.21812 & 21868 of 2009 - 3 - weeks and to retain them in the present station till that time. It was also specifically ordered that in case their representations were rejected, they have to join duty in the new places of posting and thereafter make representations. In view of the above specific stipulation contained in the impugned order, no serious prejudice is caused by the aforementioned directions in favour of the respondents in these cases. Therefore, these writ petitions are dismissed. But, the dismissal of these writ petitions will not affect the contentions of the petitioners in W.P. (C) No.21853 of 2009. Sd/- K. Balakrishnan Nair, Judge. Sd/- C.T. Ravikumar, Judge. DK. (True copy)