Delhi High Court
Pankaj Sharma vs Union Of India & Ors. on 29 July, 2020
#1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Judgment Delivered On: 29.07.2020
W.P.(C) 4704/2020
PANKAJ SHARMA .....Petitioner
versus
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. ..... Respondents
Advocates who appeared in this case:
For the Petitioner : Mr. Davinder N. Grover, Ms. Vijay Lakshami
Grover and Mr. Harsh Gupta, Advocates
For the Respondents : Mr. Jagjit Singh, Advocate
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SIDDHARTH MRIDUL
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TALWANT SINGH
JUDGMENT
SIDDHARTH MRIDUL, J. (via Video Conferencing)
CM APPL.16927/2020 (Exemption)
Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
The application is disposed of accordingly.
CM APPL.16928/2020 (Exemption)
The present application under Section 151 of the Code of Civil
Procedure, 1908 has been filed on behalf of the applicant/petitioner
seeking exemption from filing duly attested affidavits in support of the
accompanying writ petition as well as applications.
For the reasons stated in the application and in view of the
present prevailing situation, the same is allowed. The
applicant/petitioner is allowed to file the duly signed and attested
affidavits within a period of one week from the date of resumption of
regular functioning of the Court.
With the above direction, the present application is disposed of.
CM APPL.16930/2020 (Exemption)
The present application under Section 151 of the Code of Civil
Procedure, 1908 has been filed on behalf of the applicant/petitioner
seeking exemption from filing the requisite court fees.
For the reasons stated in the application and in view of the
present prevailing situation, the same is allowed. The
applicant/petitioner is allowed to file the requisite court fee within a
period of 72 hours from the date of resumption of regular functioning
of the Court.
With the above direction, the present application is disposed of.
W.P.(C) 4704/2020 & CM APPL.16929/2020 (Stay)
1. The petitioner, was heitherto working as Chief Controller in the
Northern Railway, and has been posted in Delhi since 2004.
2. The official respondents vide order dated 29.11.2019 transferred
the petitioner to Tughlakabad -- which is also located withinin the
city of New Delhi -- on administrative grounds.
3. The official respondents continued to issue orders requiring the
petitioner to join duty at Tughlakabad, the last such communication
being issued on 02.06.2020, requiring him to join immediately.
4. Aggrieved by the orders issued on behalf of the official
respondents, the petitioner instituted OA No.818/2020 titled as
'Pankaj Sharma v. Union of India & Ors.' before the learned Central
Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi (hereinafter
referred to as 'CAT').
5. The Hon'ble CAT, vide its order dated 14.07.2020, impugned in
these proceedings, held as follows:
"4. The applicant is working in the office at
Delhi since 2004. The impugned order is
issued on administrative grounds. It may
be true that the applicant is undergoing
treatment for certain ailments. All the same
he was discharging the duties at Delhi.
Things would have been different
altogether had it been a case where the
transfer is to a distant place where, the
availability of medical facilities is not
certain. The transfer, in the instant case, is
to Tughlakabad, which is part of Delhi. It
cannot be said that the applicant is put to
inconvenience, in any manner. Even while
attending the duties at Tughlakabad, he can
avail the same medical facilities.
5. So far as the request of the applicant to
entrust him the lighter duties is concerned,
it is for the respondents to deal with the
same in accordance with the existing
guidelines and procedure. Keeping the
application pending for a long time, may
not be proper.
6. We, therefore, dispose of the OA declining
to interfere with the order of transfer but
directing the respondents to pass orders on
the representation of the applicant for
entrustment of lighter duties, within a
period of two months from the date of
receipt of copy of this order. The applicant
is granted 15 days time from today to
report to duty at Tughlakabad. There shall
be no order as to costs."
6. Issue notice.
7. Mr. Jagjit Singh, learned counsel accepts notice on behalf of the
respondents.
8. With the consent of the learned counsel appearing on behalf of
the parties, the writ petition itself is taken up for hearing finally and is
disposed of with the following order.
9. It is an admitted position that the petitioner's job is a
transferrable one, in accordance with law.
10. It is further axiomatic that the petitioner, who is working as
Chief Controller in the Northern Railway and has been posted in Delhi
since 2004, has merely been transferred within the city from one
location to another on administrative grounds.
11. We are, therefore, of the considered view that the transfer of
the petitioner by the railway authorities cannot be faulted in any
manner.
12. Therefore, insofar as the Hon'ble CAT, by way of the
impugned order dated 14.07.2020, declined to interfere with the order
of transfer qua the petitioner, we are in complete agreement with the
said direction.
13. Therefore, having heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of
the parties and in view of the legal and factual position that obtains,
we direct the petitioner to report for duty at Tughlakabad on or before
05.08.2020.
14. We however, direct the official respondents/Railways to
dispose of, by way of a speaking order, in accordance with law, the
representation for entrustment of lighter duties filed by the petitioner,
under intimation to him, within four weeks from today.
15. No further directions are called for.
16. With the above directions, the writ petition is disposed of. The
pending application also stands disposed of.
SIDDHARTH MRIDUL
(JUDGE)
TALWANT SINGH
(JUDGE)
JULY 29, 2020
dn/as/rs
