Live
- A Soulful Celebration of Global Music
- Brahmin Community delegation felicitates CM Saini
- Allu Arjun Visits Chiranjeevi’s House for Lunch Meet
- Toyota organising TG Grameena Mahotsav
- Special rituals conducted at Maramma Temple
- Siddaramaiah has special love for Muslims: BJP
- We can’t afford spending less than 6% of GDP on healthcare
- Guinness World Record for continuous Hanuman Chalisa chanting
- REMOTE TRIBAL AREA TO GET NEW BRIDGE
- Dr LB College, Woxsen teams win in Climate Tank Accelerator event
SCR challenges Tribunal orders on transfers
A two-judge bench of the High Court at Hyderabad comprising Justice P V Sanjay Kumar and Justice M Seetharama Murthy on Wednesday admitted a batch of writ petitions filed by the South Central Railways requiring it to transfer a number of employees in the safety sector within a period of six months.
Hyderabad: A two-judge bench of the High Court at Hyderabad comprising Justice P V Sanjay Kumar and Justice M Seetharama Murthy on Wednesday admitted a batch of writ petitions filed by the South Central Railways requiring it to transfer a number of employees in the safety sector within a period of six months.
A total of 25 writ petitions were filed by the South Central Railways challenging orders of the Central Administrative Tribunal. Various employees working under the South Central Railways made voluntary applications seeking transfer to different railways.
It is the case of the Railways that unless the vacancy created by such transfer is filled up, the beneficiary employee cannot be relieved. It is further the case of the Railways that administrative exigencies will prevail over individual rights.
Since the Tribunal had granted a 6-month period for the Railways to complete the exercise and the same was coming to a close, the Railways contended that it could do little in the matter. Recruitment of employees was to be decided by the Railways Recruitment Board and not the State railways.
The bench recorded that no contempt would be initiated by the employee respondents, admitted the writ petitions and adjourned it for the individual respondent employees to respond.
