1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 509 OF 2008 WRIT PETITION NO. 509 OF 2008 WRIT PETITION NO. 509 OF 2008 Union of India & Ors. .. Petitioners. vs. Santosh Kumar Jangre & Ors. .. Respondents. Mr. R.B. Raghuwanshi, A.S.G. with R. Ashokan. for Petitioners. Mr. C.U. Singh, Sr. Adv. i/by K.R. Shetty for Respondent nos. 3 to 5. Mr. D.S. Chopra i/by M/s. Bina Rao & Co. for Respondent nos. 1 & 2. CORAM: J.N. PATEL, & CORAM: J.N. PATEL, & CORAM: J.N. PATEL, & SMT. NISHITA MHATRE, J. SMT. NISHITA MHATRE, J. SMT. NISHITA MHATRE, J. DATE: 4TH MARCH, 2008. DATE: 4TH MARCH, 2008. DATE: 4TH MARCH, 2008. P.C. . This petition has been filed against the order of the Central Administrative Tribunal by which the Tribunal has quashed the transfer orders issued against the respondents herein. The Central Administrative Tribunal has found that the transfers of the 2 respondents have been effected in contravention of the Transfer Policy of 2005. Clause 4.3 of the Transfer Policy reads as under :- "4.3 Directly recruited / newly promoted Group ’A’ officers shall preferably be posted to ’B / C’ stations for a minimum of 4 years after completion of training. Officers promoted from Group ’B’ to Group ’A’ shall, on promotion, be transferred out of the region in which they were previously working, unless the balance service is less than three years. As far as possible, an officer shall spend the first nine years of his service on field posts. During first six years, the officer shall not ordinarily be given a posting outside the department or sent on a deputation. After six years, an officer may be posted to the Board to serve as Under Secretary." 2. Thus, after the promotion orders were issued to the respondents in December, 2006, they ought to have been transferred immediately. The petitioners chose to continue the respondents in the same region even after promoting them and, therefore, the Tribunal has rightly found that the transfers effected before completion of 8 years in the region, on promotion is violative of the Transfer Policy of 2005. 3 3. In our opinion, the Tribunal by a well reasoned order has justifiably held that the transfers effected of the respondents were illegal and in violation of the Transfer Policy of 2005. We see no reason to interfere with the order of the Tribunal in our writ jurisdiction. However, we clarify that the impugned order is restricted to the respondents herein who were the applicants before the Tribunal. Petition rejected. (J.N. Patel, J.) (J.N. Patel, J.) (J.N. Patel, J.) (Smt. Nishita Mhatre, J.) (Smt. Nishita Mhatre, J.) (Smt. Nishita Mhatre, J.)