― Advertisement ―

HomeShahul Hameed.A vs Union Of India on 17 April, 2026

Shahul Hameed.A vs Union Of India on 17 April, 2026

ADVERTISEMENT

Kerala High Court

Shahul Hameed.A vs Union Of India on 17 April, 2026

OP(CAT)No. 64 2026

                                               2026:KER:33036
                                1

            IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                             PRESENT

             THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P.

                                &

            THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JOHNSON JOHN

 FRIDAY, THE 17TH DAY OF APRIL 2026 / 27TH CHAITHRA, 1948

                     OP (CAT) NO. 64 OF 2026

         AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 08.04.2026 IN OA NO.351 OF

2024 OF CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL,ERNAKULAM BENCH

PETITIONERS:

            SHAHUL HAMEED.A.,
            AGED 34 YEARS
            S/O ASSANAR, ASSISTANT LOCO PILOT, PALAKKAD
            JUNCTION, SOUTHERN RAILWAY,(EARLIER MANGALORE
            JUNCTION UNDER ORDERS OF TRANSFER TO CHENNAI
            DIVISION OF SOUTHERN RAILWAY), PERMANENT
            RESIDENCE: CHENNALI, MOOLANCODE.P.O.,
            KIZHAKKANCHERY, PALAKKAD, PIN - 678684

            BY ADVS.
            SHRI.T.C.GOVINDASWAMY
            SMT.KALA T.GOPI
            SHRI.KAILESH T. GOPI
            SMT.NISHITHA BALACHANDRAN
            SMT.AKHILA S.



RESPONDENTS:

     1      UNION OF INDIA,
            REPRESENTED BY THE GENERAL MANAGER, SOUTHERN
            RAILWAY, HEADQUARTERS OFFICE, PARK TOWN P.O.,
            CHENNAI, PIN - 600003
     2      THE PRINCIPAL CHIEF PERSONNEL OFFICER,
            SOUTHERN RAILWAY, HEADQUARTERS OFFICE, PARK TOWN
            P.O., CHENNAI, PIN - 600003
 OP(CAT)No. 64 2026

                                                             2026:KER:33036
                                       2


     3          THE PRINCIPAL CHIEF OPERATIONS MANAGER,
                SOUTHERN RAILWAY, HEADQUARTERS OFFICE, PARK TOWN
                P.O., CHENNAI, PIN - 600003

     4          THE DIVISIONAL RAILWAY MANAGER,
                SOUTHERN RAILWAY, PALAKKAD DIVISION, PALAKKAD,
                PIN - 678002

     5          THE SENIOR DIVISIONAL PERSONNEL OFFICER,
                SOUTHERN RAILWAY, PALAKKAD DIVISION, PALAKKAD,
                PIN - 678002

     6          THE SENIOR DIVISIONAL ELECTRICAL
                ENGINEER(OPERATIONS),
                SOUTHERN RAILWAY, PALAKKAD DIVISION, PALAKKAD,
                PIN - 678002

     7          THE DIVISIONAL RAILWAY MANAGER,
                SOUTHERN RAILWAY, CHENNAI DIVISION,HEADQUARTERS
                OFFICE COMPLEX, PARK TOWN P.O., CHENNAI, PIN -
                600003

     8          THE SENIOR DIVISIONAL PERSONNEL OFFICER,
                SOUTHERN RAILWAY, CHENNAI DIVISION,HEADQUARTERS
                OFFICE COMPLEX, PARK TOWN P.O., CHENNAI, PIN -
                600003

     9          THE CHIEF CREW CONTROLLER,
                SOUTHERN RAILWAY,MANGALORE JUNCTION,
                MANGALORE,KARNATAKA, PIN - 575007

                BY ADV SHRI.B.RAJESH (KOTTAYAM), SENIOR PANEL
                COUNSEL


         THIS    OP   (CAT)   HAVING       COME   UP   FOR   ADMISSION   ON
17.04.2026,        THE   COURT   ON    THE    SAME     DAY   DELIVERED   THE
FOLLOWING:
 OP(CAT)No. 64 2026

                                                       2026:KER:33036
                                   3

                         JUDGMENT

(Dated this the 17th day of April, 2026)

GOPINATH. P, J

SPONSORED

This original petition has been filed challenging the

order dated 08.04.2026 in OA No.180/351/2024 on the file of

the Central Administrative Tribunal, Ernakulam Bench

( hereinafter referred to as the Tribunal). The petitioner is an

Assistant Loco Pilot. He was originally part of the Chennai

Division of the Southern Railway. On his request he was

transferred to the Palakkad Division and was posted to

Mangalore. The petitioner had approached the Tribunal

challenging this transfer back to the Chennai Division.

2. It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner has

been transferred back to Chennai Division as a matter of

punishment which is illegal and unsustainable in law. The

petitioner also has a case that the transfer is contrary to the

stipulations in Annexure-A8 order of the Railway Board which

contemplates that disciplinary proceedings against the Railway

employee must be continued in the Division where he or she

was employed at the time when he or she committed the

offence. In other words, it is the case of the petitioner that the

disciplinary proceedings initiated against the petitioner in
OP(CAT)No. 64 2026

2026:KER:33036
4

Palakkad Division must be continued and concluded while the

petitioner is working in Palakkad Division and he should not

have been transferred back to Chennai Division when

disciplinary proceedings were pending in Palakkad Division.

The learned Counsel for the petitioner also place reliance on

the judgment of the Supreme Court in Somesh Tiwari v.

Union of India and Others [2009 (2) SCC 592] to contend

that transfer can never be made as a matter of punishment. It

is pointed out that even going by the reply submitted by the

official respondents before the Tribunal, the main reason for

the transfer is that three disciplinary proceedings have been

initiated against the petitioner in the Palakkad Division. It is

submitted that the Tribunal had initially granted a stay against

the transfer of the petitioner from Palakkad Division to Chennai

Division and pending the original application, the petitioner

was transfered from Mangalore to Palakkad (within the

Palakkad Division). It is submitted that there is no reason to

transfer the petioner to Chennai Division and such transfer

cannot be justified.

3. The learned Counsel appearing for the Railway

Administration would submit that transfer is an incidence of

service. It is submitted that since the petitioner had been
OP(CAT)No. 64 2026

2026:KER:33036
5

transferred to Palakkad Division on the basis of his request and

since three disciplinary proceedings were initiated against the

petitioner while serving in Palakkad Division, it was thought fit

in the interest of Administration that the petitioner be

transferred back to Chennai Division. It is submitted that the

transfer back to Chennai division is not a punishment and is

only routine administrative act. It is submitted that the

judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Somesh Tiwari

(Supra) does not apply in the facts of the present case where

the petitioner has only been transferred back to his parent

division after canceling his transfer (on request) to the

Palakkad division. It is also submitted that the Railway Board

instructions produced as Annexure A8 along with the original

application does not apply as those instructions deal only with

the continuation of disciplinary proceedings and not with the

transfer from one division to the other while disciplinary

proceedings are pending.

4. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the

petitioner and the learned counsel appearing for the railway

administration, we are of the view that no interference is called

for with Ext.P1 order of the Tribunal in O.A No. 180/351/2024 .

The Tribunal has considered the contentions raised by the
OP(CAT)No. 64 2026

2026:KER:33036
6

petitioner. The Tribunal has held that the transfer of the

petitioner from the Palakkad Division to the Chennai Division

was not a matter of punishment. The Tribunal has found that

the transfer of the petitioner from Palakkad Division to Chennai

Division was justified on the facts and circumstances of the

case and on account of the Administrative efficiency. The

judgment of the Supreme Court in Somesh Tiwari (Supra) no

doubt holds that the transfer cannot be as a matter of

punishment. However, in the facts of the present case, it has to

be noted that the petitioner was transferred to Palakkad

Division on request from the Chennai Division and on account

of the disciplinary proceedings initiated against the petitioner

one after the other in Palakkad Division, the Railway

Administration is thought it fit to repatriate the petitioner

back to the Chennai Division. Such repatriation cannot be

termed as a punishment transfer and in essentially only on

repatriation to the parent Division after canceling the grant of

inter-divisional transfer on the basis of the request put in by

the petitioner. It is settled law that the transfer is an incidence

of service and in the facts of the present case, we find no

reason to hold that there was any malice in the transfer of the

petitioner from the Palakkad Division to the Chennai Division.
OP(CAT)No. 64 2026

2026:KER:33036
7

No other point has been raised before this Court, though

several other contentions appear to have been considered by

the Tribunal.

The original petition is therefore dismissed. It is made

clear that the dismissal of this original petition or the dismissal

of OA No.180/351/2024 will not prevent the petitioner from

making a suitable representation to the competent authority.

Sd/-

GOPINATH P.
JUDGE

Sd/-

JOHNSON JOHN
JUDGE

AKH
OP(CAT)No. 64 2026

2026:KER:33036
8

APPENDIX OF OP (CAT) NO. 64 OF 2026

PETITIONER ANNEXURES

Annexure-A1 A TRUE COPY OF THE OFFICE ORDER NO.J/PR
27/2024 DATED 24.06.2024, ISSUED BY THE
5TH RESPONDENT.

Annexure-A2 A TRUE COPY OF THE OFFICE ORDER NO.MJ
50 DATED 24.06.2024, ISSUED BY THE 9TH
RESPONDENT.

Annexure-A3          A TRUE COPY OF THE RELIEVING ORDER
                     NO.J/P.676/V/PR/IDT/IRT              DATED
                     26.06.2024,     ISSUED    BY    THE    5TH
                     RESPONDENT.
Annexure-A4          A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER BEARING
                     NO.M/P(1E)        LRG/155/2021       DATED
                     29.11.2021,     ISSUED    BY    THE    8TH
                     RESPONDENT.
Annexure-A5          A   TRUE    COPY     OF   ORDER    BEARING
                     NO.J/P.676/        V/PR/IDT/IRT/VOL.XXVII

DATED 03.07.2023, ISSUED BY THE 5TH
RESPONDENT.

Annexure-A6 A TRUE COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM BEARING
NO.J/E(OP)/226/DAR /SF5/ 15215MS1554
DATED 28.05.2024, ISSUED BY THE 6TH
RESPONDENT.

Annexure-A7 A TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY SUBMITTED BY
THE APPLICANT DATED 04.06.2024.

Annexure-A8          A TRUE COPY OF THE RAILWAY BOARD ORDER
                     BEARING     RBE      NO.120/2005     DATED
                     18.07.2005.
Annexure-A9          A TRUE COPY OF THE APPENDIX VI OF THE

INDIAN RAILWAY ESTABLISHMENT CODE VOL.I
AS PUBLISHED BY THE RAILWAY BOARD.

Annexure-A10 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER BEARING
NO.E(O)III2014/PL/03 DATED 10.06.2014
ISSUED BY THE RAILWAY BOARD.

Annexure-A11 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER BEARING RBE
NO.109/2015 DATED 21.09.2015.

Annexure-R1          TRUE COPIES OF THE MEMO OF CHARGES
                     DATED       28.02.2024,        28.05.2024,
                     21.06.2024.
Annexure-R2          TRUE COPY OF THE RAILWAY BOARD LETTER
                     NO.2023/TT-1/76/STAFF/07/DUTY        HOURS
                     DATED 12.10.2023.
 OP(CAT)No. 64 2026

                                                 2026:KER:33036
                                9

Annexure-R3          TRUE    COPY    OF    THE    LETTER    DATED
                     19.06.2024 OF THE PCPO/MAS.
Annexure-R4          TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT EXTRACT OF

MODEL SCHEDULE OF POWERS (SOP) 2018.
Annexure-R5 TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT EXTRACT OF
MASTER CIRCULAR NO.66.

Annexure-R6 TRUE COPY OF THE SANCTION ORDER OF THE
DRM/PGT DATED 13.06.2024.

Annexure-R7 TRUE COPY OF THE SANCTION ORDER OF THE
DRM/MAS DATED 14.06.2024.

Annexure-R8 TRUE COPY OF THE EXTRACT OF RULE 227OF
INDIAN RAILWAY ESTABLISHMENT CODE
Annexure-A12 A TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER BEARING
NO.J/E.OP.226/DAR/ABS/MAJN1297 DATED
28.02.2024 ISSUED BY THE 6TH
RESPONDENT.

Annexure-A13 A TRUE COPY OF THE APPENDIX VI OF THE
INDIAN RAILWAY ESTABLISHMENT CODE,
VOL.I.
Annexure-A14 A TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL SUBMITTED BY
THE APPLICANT DATED 16TH MAY, 2025 TO
THE ADDITIONAL DIVISIONAL RAILWAY
MANAGER-II, PALAKKAD.

Exhibit-P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN
O.A.NO.180/351/2024 DATED 08.04.2026
RENDERED BY THE LEARNED C.A.T.
Exhibit-P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE O.A.NO.180/351/2024
FILED BEFORE THE LEARNED C.A.T., ALONG
WITH ITS ANNEXURES
Exhibit-P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY STATEMENT
DATED 19.06.2025 FILED ON BEHALF OF THE
RESPONDENTS, ALONG WITH ITS ANNEXURES
Exhibit-P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE REJOINDER DATED
24.08.2025 FILED BY THE APPLICANT IN
O.A.NO.180/351/2024
Exhibit-P5 A TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER DATED
28.06.2024 IN O.A.NO.180/351/2024 AS
DOWNLOADED FROM THE WEBSITE OF THE
LEARNED C.A.T.
Exhibit-P6 A TRUE COPY OF THE MESSAGE BEARING
NO.J/AC 8/10/13 DATED 08.10.2025
THROUGH CHIEF CREW CONTROLLER/MANGALORE
JUNCTION
Exhibit-P7 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER BEARING
NO.CCRC/PGT AS COMMUNICATED TO THE
PETITIONER THROUGH WHATSAPP DATED
OP(CAT)No. 64 2026

2026:KER:33036
10

09.10.2025 ISSUED BY THE CHIEF CREW
CONTROLLER
Exhibit-P8 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER BEARING
NO.J/PR 09/2026 DATED 17.03.2026 ISSUED
FROM THE OFFICE OF THE 5TH RESPONDENT



Source link