Sr. No. Date f / SHRl SHYAM SALES 02-03 Orders 02/6.2003 , • Present: Mr.A.K.Ganguly, Sr.Advocate with Mr.Anin K.Sharma^ Advocate for tlie petiiioner. CW 4(>05/2«03 1 Petitioner is a DANICS Cadre Officer holding the post of Controller of Weights and Measures since September 2001. He was ordered to be transfeixed to Andaman and Nicobar by order dated 9.5.2002. He made a representation against this order complaining that under the policy his seniors were/considered for transfer first. On this his ti'ansfer was defeixed. He was eventually ordered to be relieved on 12.12.2002 by Delhi Administration. He challenged this and was required to make a representation which was ultimately rejected. His OA 479/2003 was also dismissed bv the Tribunal bv order dated 26.5.2003. >/ V Petitioner in effect challenges his transfer on the ground that his senioi-shad gone untouched in violation of the policy and tiiat he could not be transferred to a ex-cadre post under tiie Rules. Tlie stand of the respondent-jis that his seniors were transfeiTCdby order dated 27.1.2003 and tliat respondent No.2 had not relieved them till date. On the other issue, it is submitted that rales does not debar Sasi/any posting to an ex-cadre post and tliis plea was premature at tliis stage as petitioner's posting orders were yet to be passed. We have examined the impugned order and, in our view, tlie Signing Date:04.12.2024 17:16:45 Certify that the digital and physical file have been compared and the digital data is as per the physical file and no page is missing. Signature Not Verified r Sr. No. Date t SHRI SHYAM SALES 02-03 Orders / . only sumvingissue that remains to be consideredis whetlierpetitioner was entitledto asimilartreatmentlikehis senior. Accordingto him his seniorswere notbeingrelievedbuthe wasbeingpickedupfordifferential treatmentand was beingrelievedby RespondentNo.2. It is. not known whether petitioner's seniors were being retainedby DelhiAdministrationon administrativeexigency. Be that as it may,it was for petitionerto approachDelhi Administrationin thisregard and to seek appropriateorders. He may do so within one week from today and concernedauthorityis also directedto examinethis aspect of thematterand passappropriateordersthereonwithinoneweek thereafter. Status''^on today shallbe maintainedin respectof petitioner'spresent statusaiidposition,for two weeksonly. Petitionis disposedofaccordingly. Dasti. June 02- 2003; da rATION JUDGE) BADARDURRHZAHMBD,J. (VACATIONJUDGE)