Delhi High Court
Komendra Prakash Gautam vs Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan & ... on 6 October, 2021
$~24 (2021 list)
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Date of decision: 06.10.2021
+ W.P.(C) 11469/2021
KOMENDRA PRAKASH GAUTAM ......Petitioner
Through: Mr. Devesh Chauvia, Advocate.
versus
KENDRIYA VIDYALAYA SANGATHAN & ORS...... Respondents
Through: Mr. Anil Nag, Advocate.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TALWANT SINGH
RAJIV SHAKDHER, J.: (ORAL)
[Court hearing convened via video-conferencing on account of COVID-19]
CM APPLs. 35304-05/2021
1. Allowed, subject to just exceptions.
W.P.(C) 11469/2021
CM APPL. 35303/2021[Application filed on behalf of the petitioner for
interim relief]
CM APPL. 35306/2021[Application filed on behalf of the petitioner for
taking on record additional documents]
2. With the consent of the counsel for the parties, the writ petition is
taken up for hearing and final disposal.
W.P.(C) 11469/2021 Pg. 1 of 3
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:HARIOM
Signing Date:08.10.2021
16:03:18
3. This writ petition is directed against the interlocutory order dated
27.09.2021, passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal (in short 'the
Tribunal') in O.A. No.2108/2021.
3.1 The petitioner had approached the Tribunal against his transfer order,
dated 27.08.2021, passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Kendriya Vidyalaya
Sangathan.
3.2. A perusal of the impugned order shows that, the petitioner has
assailed his transfer order on the following grounds:
(i) The order has been passed by an incompetent authority.
(ii) The order is mala fide.
(iii) The order is punitive in nature.
3.3. Mr. Devesh Chauvia, who appears on behalf of the petitioner, says
that, the petitioner is retiring in the next three years, and therefore, as per
respondents guidelines i.e., the Transfer Guidelines of Kendriya Vidyalaya
Sangathan 2021, he cannot be transferred.
3.4. We have noticed, upon reading the impugned order of the Tribunal,
that, they have granted time to the respondents to file a reply in the matter,
and have kept the matter for consideration qua interim relief sought, vis-a-
vis transfer order dated 27.08.2021, on 25.10.2021.
3.5. Given this position, Mr. Anil Nag, who appears on advance notice on
behalf of the respondents, says that, there are good and robust administrative
reasons as to, why the petitioner should be transferred.
4. In our opinion, these are matters [as referred to hereinabove], which
the Tribunal needs to examine, and pass orders, one way or the other, either
W.P.(C) 11469/2021 Pg. 2 of 3
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:HARIOM
Signing Date:08.10.2021
16:03:18
with regard to the interim relief sought by the petitioner, or in the
alternative, render a decision in the main matter.
4.1. Since the Tribunal, as noticed above, has kept the matter for
consideration on the aspect of interim relief, on 25.10.2021, we do not think
it fit to make any observations as to the merits of the petitioner's case.
4.2. However, we find weight in the submission of the counsel for the
petitioner that, if the respondents were to effect the transfer of the petitioner
between now and 25.10.2021, the O.A. filed by petitioner, i.e., OA
No.2108/2021, would be rendered infructuous.
5. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of with the direction that,
the respondents will maintain status quo till the Tribunal takes up the matter
for hearing, on 25.10.2021.
6. It is made clear that, the Tribunal will be free to pass an appropriate
order, including an order to either continue or modify, or even vacate the
status quo order passed by us today, albeit, after factoring the contentions
advanced on behalf of the parties.
7. Consequently, pending applications shall also stand closed.
RAJIV SHAKDHER, J.
TALWANT SINGH, J.
OCTOBER 6, 2021 / tr
Click here to check corrigendum, if any
W.P.(C) 11469/2021 Pg. 3 of 3
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:HARIOM
Signing Date:08.10.2021
16:03:18
