SHAMBHU NATH SAH vs DEPARTMENT OF POSTS

1

(Open Court)
Central Administrative Tribunal
Allahabad Bench, Allahabad


Original Application No.1241 of 2026
th
This the30 Day of October, 2026.
Hon’ble Ms. Manju Pandey, Member (A)
Shambhu Nath Sah, aged about 58 years, S/o Shri Ram Bilas
Sah, R/o 362, EWS, KDA, Colony, Dehli Sujanpur, COD SO
Kanpur-208013.
….Applicant .
By Advocate: Shri Ashok Kumar Shukla

Versus
1. Union of India through its Secretary, Government of India,
Ministry of Communication, Department of Posts, Dak
Bhawan, Sansad Marg, New Delhi-110001.
2. Director General (Post), Dak Bhawan, Sansad Marg, New
Delhi-110001.
3. The Chief Post Master General U.P. Circle, Lucknow PIN-
226001.
4. Director, Postal Services, Kanpur Region, Kanpur.
5. Senior Superintendent of Post Offices, Kanpur City Division,
Kanpur.
… Respondents
By Advocate: Shri Chakrapani Vatsyayan.
ORDER
VIVEK
RAWAT

2

Heard, Shri Ashok Kumar Shukla, counsel for the
applicant and Shri Chakrapani Vatsyayan, counsel for the
respondents.
2. The instant original application has been filed seeking
following reliefs: -
“ (a)Issue an appropriate order or direction
commanding Respondent Nos.2 to 5 to post and adjust
the applicant in any of the three opted post offices
submitted vide his option dated 20.01.2026 namely
Choice-1 LSG PA, Kanpur Cantt. H.O., Choice-2 LSG PA,
D.O. K.P. City Division, Kanpur, Choice-3 LSG PA.,
Harjinder Nagar S.O. or in the alternative at any post
office situated within 8 K.m. of his resident i.e. 362 EWS
KDA Colony, Delhi Sujanpur COD SO Kanpur-208013 in
accordance with departmental guide lines governing
near retirement posts.
(b) any other relief which this Hon’ble Tribunal may
deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case to
meet the end of justice.
(ii) Award the cost of Original Application in favour of
the applicant.
3. Brief facts of the case as stated by the applicant that the
applicant is an employee of the Department of Posts and has
completed his tenure as S.P.M., Napier Road S.O. He has
been a diligent and meritorious employee and has received
rewards on 27.07.2001, 27.06.2003, 03.05.2010 and in May
2014. The applicant is due to superannuate on 29.02.2028
and, at the time of the impugned transfer order, had less than
two years of service remaining, thereby falling within the
category of employees nearing retirement under the
VIVEK
RAWAT

3

applicable transfer policy and rotational transfer guidelines
of the Department of Posts. Pursuant to the calling circular
bearing No. B-21/Tfr-Posting/2026/PA/KP City dated
02/05.01.2026, issued by Respondent No. 5, inviting options
from eligible officials for rotational transfer, the applicant
submitted his option form on 20.01.2026, indicating his three
preferences, namely, (i) L.S.G. P.A., Kanpur Cantt. H.O., (ii)
L.S.G. P.A., D.O., K.P. City Division, Kanpur, and (iii) L.S.G.
P.A., Harjendar Nagar S.O., while specifically mentioning his
impending superannuation in February 2028. However,
Respondent No. 5, vide impugned transfer order dated
17.04.2026, arbitrarily ignored all three preferences without
assigning any reason and transferred the applicant as S.P.M.,
Narwal S.O., situated approximately 30 kilometres from his
residence, thereby compelling him to undertake a daily
commute of more than 60 kilometres through public
transport and causing considerable physical hardship,
financial burden and mental distress at the fag end of his
service career. Aggrieved thereby, the applicant submitted a
detailed representation dated 20.04.2026 to the appellate
authority, i.e., Respondent No. 4, through proper channel,
seeking modification of the impugned transfer order and
adjustment at any one of his three opted stations; however,
VIVEK
RAWAT

4

the applicant has been constrained to approach this Hon'ble
Tribunal for redressal of his grievance. Hence the original
application.
4. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted limited
prayed to consider the representations dated 20.04.2026 by
passing a reasoned and speaking order, within a time bound
manner.
5. Learned counsel for the respondents has no issue if an
order to decide the representation of the applicant is passed
without going into the merits of the case.
6. Having considered the facts and circumstances of the
case, and considering that the matter pertains to the transfer
order dated 17.04.2026, whereby the applicant was
transferred from S.P.M., Napier Road S.O. to S.P.M., Narwal
S.O. upon completion of his tenure against a vacant post. The
applicant had submitted a representation dated 20.04.2026,
requesting his transfer to a nearby Post Office, keeping in
view the fact that he is due to retire within less than two
years. Accordingly, Original Application No. 1241 of 2026 is
disposed of with a direction to the respondents/competent
authority to consider the grievance of the applicant and
decide his pending representation dated 20.04.2026 by
VIVEK
RAWAT

5

passing a reasoned and speaking order within a period of
two months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this
order.
7. No order as to costs.


(Ms. Manju Pandey)
Member (A)

/Vivek/

VIVEK
RAWAT