CWP No. 16233 of 2011 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. CWP No. 16233 of 2011 Date of decision 2.9.2011 Yoginder Kumar . Petitioner Versus The Central Administrative Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench, Chandigarh and others .. Respondents. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M. KUMAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GURDEV SINGH Present: Mr.Ramesh Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner 1. To be referred to the Reporter or not ? 2. Whether the judgement should be reported in the Digest ? M.M.KUMAR, J. 1. The petitioner has challenged order dated 12.8.2011 (P.18) passed by the Chandigarh Bench of the Central Administrative Tribunal (for brevity 'the Tribunal') rejecting the claim of the petitioner that he has been transferred against a non sanctioned post and there is hostile discrimination practiced against him inasmuch as his colleague Gurnam Singh, who has longer stay at the same station has been allowed to continue at Chandigarh whereas he has been asked to join at Guwahati. The view of the Tribunal is discernible from paras 4,5 and 6 which reads as under: “4. Annexure R.2 purports to indicate the redistribution of the scientific and ministerial manpower available with the CFSLs. That documentation contains the number of sanctioned posts available at the present Centres alongwith the levels thereof and also the places to which the relevant manpower is proposed to be transferred. CWP No. 16233 of 2011 2 5. A perusal of the contents of Annexure R.2 would suggest that it pertains to the re-distribution of “existing scientific and ministerial manpower in Central Forensic Laboratories, Hyderabad, Kolkata, Chandigarh/ Shimla, now Hi-Tech Central Forensic Institutes, Bhopal, Pune, Guwahati and Directorate of Forensic Science Services, New Delhi.” 6. In the light thereof, the applicant cannot be heard to argue that he is being transferred against a non sanctioned post inasmuch as it is apparent from a perusal of the pleadings raised by the parties ( and also the documentation placed on record in support thereof) that the applicant would be taking alongwith one post in compliance with the restructuring decision taken by the Government of India (Ministry of Home Affairs) vide Annexures R-1 and R-2.” 2. From the perusal of the findings recorded by the Tribunal it is evident that the petitioner has not been transferred against a non sanctioned post. There is re-distribution of the cadre and a new Forensic Laboratory(s) has been opened at various places including Guwahati. He has been posted as Section Officer there. There is neither any impropriety nor any jurisdictional error in the order passed by the Tribunal. The Tribunal has also rejected the argument concerning discrimination alleged to have been committed in passing the order of transfer. 3. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, we are of the considered view that the order passed by the Tribunal does not suffer from any error of law or fact. The Tribunal has recorded categorical finding that the petitioner has been transferred against a sanctioned post and there is CWP No. 16233 of 2011 3 no discrimination. The writ petition is wholly without merit and the same is dismissed. (M.M.Kumar) Judge (Gurdev Singh) 2.9.2011 Judge okg