Kuldeep Mor vs DEFENCE

1 OA 310/01214/2026
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
CHENNAI BENCH

OA 310/01214/2026
th

Dated Monday, the 26 day of October, Two Thousand and Twenty Six

CORAM :

HON'BLE MR. M. SWAMINATHAN, Member (J)

Kuldeep Mor
Multi Tasking Staff (Civilian),
23 Equipment Depot,
Air Force Station, Avadi,
Chennai 600 055. … Applicant

By Advocate Dr. S. S. Swaminathan
Vs

1. Union of India, Ministry of Defence, Rep by
The Civil Gazetted Officer (Admin),
OIC Civil Admin II,
Air Force Station, Avadi
Chennai 600 055.

2. The Air Officer Commanding,
Civil Admin Section,
23 Equipment Depot,
Air Force Station,
Avadi, Chennai 600 055. …Respondents

By Advocate Mr. Su. Srinivasan, SCGSC

2 OA 310/01214/2026

ORAL ORDER


(Pronounced by Hon'ble Mr. M. Swaminathan, Member(J))


In the instant OA, the applicant seeks the following relief:
st
"a. To call for the records of the 1 Respondent pertaining to
the impugned order in proceedings bearing No.
23ED/3001/66548/PC dated 29/05/2026 and quash the same
and consequently direct the Respondents to issue posting
order on compassionate ground at the station of the
Applicant's wife ie. at Lucknow or to any other place nearer
to Lucknow.
b. Any other relief or relief's, as this Tribunal may deem fit
and proper in the circumstances of the case.”

2. Brief facts of the case as submitted by the applicant is as follows:
The Applicant was offered appointment for the post of Civilian Multi Tasking
Staff Gen (UR) category in the Pay Matrix of Rs.18,000/- in Level 1 & Index 1
by the 2nd Respondent under Letter No.23ED/3001/NYA/PC dated 06.04.2022
and the Applicant joined the service with the 2nd Respondent from 28.04.2022.
The Applicant got married on 22.03.2023 and had a male child born on
26.01.24. The Applicant's wife is employed as a Ward Shayika in Command
Hospital Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh from 18.09.2024 and living at Lucknow. The
Applicant's wife is finding it difficult to manage her responsibility as a mother
and also her professional duties in the absence of her husband ie. the Applicant
nd
herein. The Applicant made a request on 03.03.2025 to the 2 Respondent
herein for posting on compassionate grounds to any place nearer to his wife's

3 OA 310/01214/2026
work place ie. at Lucknow as provided by the Office Memorandum dated
30.09.2009. The 1st Respondent by proceedings in 23ED/3001/66548/PC(BM)
dated 11.08.2025 intimated that no posting application is pending at Air HQ
against replacement of MTS based on the remarks of Stn.Cdr. The Applicant
renewed his request for posting on compassionate ground by letter dated
04.11.2025 to the 2nd Respondent herein. The 1st Respondent without
considering the family circumstances and the office memorandums in force
rejected the request erroneously on the same reasoning that no posting
application is pending at Air HQ against replacement of MTS based on the
remarks of Stn.Cdr by impugned proceedings in 23ED/3001/66548/PC dated
29.05.2026. Hence the applicant has filed this OA seeking the above relief.

3. The learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the action of the first
respondent in passing the impugned order in not granting posting on
compassionate grounds is against the principles of natural justice contrary to the
rules and guidelines issued by the Government. He further submitted that the
first respondent failed to consider the OM dated 30.09.2009 and 24.11.2022
while deciding the request of the applicant for transfer on compassionate
grounds. He further submitted that the respondents have not given any reason
for the conclusion which is based on the remarks of Station Commander. He
finally submitted that the first respondent ought to have granted posting on
compassionate ground to the applicant either to Lucknow or other place near to

4 OA 310/01214/2026
that and nothing was considered by the respondents. Therefore, he prayed for
the relief sought in the present OA.

4. Heard the learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. Su. Srinivasan,
SCGSC who takes notice on behalf of the respondents and perused the materials
placed on record.

5. This Tribunal finds that the impugned orders dated 11.08.2025 and
29.05.2026, passed by the respondents are cryptic and non-speaking orders.

6. However, in the interest of justice, both the impugned orders dated
11.08.2025 and 29.05.2026 are set aside and the respondents are directed to
reconsider the representations of the applicant dated 03.03.2025 (Annexure A5)
and 04.11.2025 (Annexure A7) and pass a well-reasoned and speaking order
within a period of 45 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order. This
Tribunal is not entering into the merits of the case at this stage.

7. With the above directions, the OA is disposed of at the admission stage
itself.

(M. Swaminathan)
Member (J)
26.10.2026

Digitally signed
by P ARUNA
SOWBHAGYA
Date: 2026.11.02
15:40:06 +05'30'
P ARUNA SOWBHAGYA
COURT MASTER
CAT,MADRAS BENCH