IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.13202 of 2005 1. UNION OF INDIA through the Director General –cum- Secretary, Department of Posts, Dak Bhawan, New Delhi 2. The Chief Postmaster General, Bihar Circle, Patna 3. The Chief Postmaster General, Jharkhand Circle, Ranchi 4. The Assistant Director (Staff & Recruitment) o/o Chief Postmaster General, Bihar Circle, Patna 5. The Postmaster General, Northern Region, Muzaffarpur 6. The Director of Postal Services, Northern Region, Muzaffarpur 7. The Assistant Director (Staff) O/o the Postmaster General, Northern Region, Muzaffarpur …Petitioners Versus 1. PREM PRAKASH , son of Shri Nand Kishore Singh, resident of village Madhopur, PO Chandrahatti, PS Kudhanni, Muzaffarpur 2. The Central Administrative Tribunal, Patna Bench, Patna, through its Registrar…. Respondents ----------- 3 12.4.2010 Heard Mr. Gopesh Kumar for the petitioners, and Mr. Hemant Kumar Karn for respondent no.1. This writ petition is directed against the order dated 11.3.2005 (Annexure 5), passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal in OA No.343 of 2004 (Prem Prakash v The Union of India & Ors.), whereby the original application preferred by respondent no.1 herein, has been allowed and his allocation to the newly-created circle of Jharkhand has been set aside. Hence this writ petition at the instance of the Department. 2. A brief statement of facts essential for the disposal of the writ petition may be indicated. Respondent no.1 herein is a Postal Assistant in the Department of Posts and Telegraph, Govt. of India. He was assigned the North-East Circle, and the cadre is circle-wise. Consequent upon the bifurcation of the undivided State of Bihar in terms of the Bihar 2 Re-organization Act with effect 15.11.2000, the present State of Jharkhand was carved out and created as a new State in the Union of India. Consequent upon the creation of the new State, the Department of Post and Telegraph decided to create a separate Jharkhand Circle on 12.1.2001. 2.1) On the petitioner’s own request, he was transferred from North East Circle to the newly created Circle of the present State of Bihar on 5.7.2001. In view of the position that it was a request transfer, he was assigned bottom seniority in the present Bihar Circle. After creation of Jharkhand Circle, the Department decided to allocate two Assistants to the Jharkhand Circle. In view of the position that none was willing to be so allocated, the Department formulated a policy decision on 7.8.2001, that two of the junior-most Assistants in the undivided Bihar Circle shall be allocated to the Jharkhand Circle. Consequently, two other persons of the undivided circle were allocated to the Jharkhand Circle. They represented before the authorities that, on the date of the decision to allocate to the Jharkhand Circle, respondent no.1 was one of the junior-most persons and may be allocated to the State of Jharkhand. The order of transfer was consequently altered, and respondent no.1 herein was included amongst the two persons to be transferred to Jharkhand Circle leading to the present OA No.343 of 2004, which has been allowed. The Tribunal has held that respondent no.1 herein cannot be transferred to Jharkhand Circle because of 3 request transfer from North-East Circle to Bihar Circle, he has been given bottom seniority. 3. We have perused the materials on record and considered the submissions of learned counsel for the parties. Respondent no.1 was on his own request transferred from North- East Circle to the Bihar Circle in terms of Paragraph 38(2) of the Department’s policy and is reproduced hereinbelow:- “38. Transfer at one’s own request (1) ……… ……….. ……….. (2) When an official is transferred at his own request but without arranging for mutual exchange, he will rank junior in the gradation list of the new unit to all officials of that unit on the date on which the transfer order issued, including also all persons who have been approved for appointment to that grade as on that date.” It is thus evident that clause whereunder such a request transfer takes place, is quite stringent and the employee seeking such request transfer loses very heavily after joining the new circle. Therefore, every effort has to be made to ensure that he continues to be in the circle of his choice. It is further relevant to state that Jharkhand Circle was created on 12.1.2001, on which date respondent no.1 was not in the undivided Bihar Circle. 4. In the result, we do not find any merit in this writ petition. It is accordingly dismissed. ( S K Katriar ) ( Kishore K Mandal ) mrl 4