monster

Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share on LinkedIn

Share on Email

Share More

Union Of India Vs Laxminarayanan: There Is No Justification In Transferring A Person From One Quarter To Another Quarter Of The Same Locality Due To His/Her Promotion

Brinda Kundu ,
  20 July 2021       Share Bookmark

Court :

Brief :
There is no justification in transferring a person from one quarter to another quarter of the same locality due to his/her promotion
Citation :
2001 (1) WLN 15


Bench:
A Lakshmanan, R Balia

Appellant:
Union of India

Respondent:
Mr.Laxminarayanan

Issue

The respondent was ordered to shift from one quarter to another quarter in the same locality and with the same facilities because of his promotion.

Facts

  • Laxminarayanan, the respondent was asked to shift from his quarter L/35 to L/166 after his promotion to Chief Loco Inspector.
  • Both of the quarters were in the same locality, before his position as Loco Foreman.
  • The problem rose because Mr. P C Gupta was allotted L/35 quarter for which the respondent had to vacate and move to L/166.
  • The Central Administrative Tribunal stated that there is no justice in shifting an individual from quarter to quarter of the same locality with the same facilities, which does not make any sense.
  • The Central Administrative Tribunal has directed the respondent to continue to stay in his quarter itself (L/35).

Appellant’s Contentions

Union of India contends that the Central Administrative Tribunal has acted beyond its scope and in result of that, the appellant has filed a Writ Petition under Article 327 of Indian Constitution under the High Court of Rajasthan.

Respondent’s Contentions

Laxminarayan, the respondent, claims that there is no point in his transfer from one quarter to another. He wants to continue to reside in the quarters where he was posted and simply does not want to vacate and shift to the same kind of house in the same locality in which he resided before, which obviously makes no point.

Relevant Paragraphs from the Original Judgement (4 and 6)

  • Mr. R.K. Soni, learned Counsel for the Union of India, submitted that the Tribunal has exceeded its jurisdiction and has even gone to regularise the allotment de hore the allotment made by the Railways. The Tribunal has substituted its wisdom for that of the departmental authorities.
  • Simply because a person has been promoted to the post of Chief Loco Inspector he could not be required to shift from one quarter to another of the same type. We see no merit in the writ petition and it fails.

Judgment

The Rajasthan High Court straight away dismissed the writ petition as it stated that there is no merit in the case taken by the Petitioner. The Court mentioned that it didn’t see any justification in transferring a person from one quarter to another quarter of the same locality due to his/her promotion, therefore it rejected the plea.

Click here to download the original copy of the judgement

 
"Loved reading this piece by Brinda Kundu?
Join LAWyersClubIndia's network for daily News Updates, Judgment Summaries, Articles, Forum Threads, Online Law Courses, and MUCH MORE!!"



Published in Others
Views : 175




Comments





LCI Learning Hindu Laws


Latest Judgments


More »


Post a Suggestion for LCI Team
Post a Legal Query