A Scouts and Guides service bond does not bar spouse transfer absent an express divisional restriction.

The applicant was appointed to a Level-1 post in the Southern Railway’s Trivandrum Division under the Scouts and Guides quota.

His appointment terms required him to execute an agreement to serve the Scouts and Guides organisation for at least ten years, but the Railway did not obtain the agreement at the time of appointment.

The applicant later sought an inter-Railway one-way transfer to the South East Central Railway on spouse grounds. The Trivandrum Division granted a no-objection and approved the transfer, and the applicant was relieved by the hospital; however, the Divisional Personnel Officer refused to issue the further relieving order. The Railway subsequently directed him to report back and cancelled the transfer, citing the ten-year service condition.

The applicant challenged those directions before the Tribunal. An interim stay of the cancellation orders was granted and continued during the proceedings.

Whether the applicant’s ten-year obligation to serve the Scouts and Guides organisation required him to remain in the Trivandrum Division or Southern Railway for that period, thereby preventing the approved spouse-ground transfer.

Whether the applicant could be required to execute the prescribed bond after appointment, and whether the transfer could be implemented subject to that bond.

The Tribunal applied the terms of the applicant’s appointment order, which required an agreement to serve the Scouts and Guides organisation for a minimum of ten years, and the corresponding appointment condition in the office order.

It treated the obligation as enforceable despite the Railway’s failure to obtain the bond when the applicant was appointed. However, the obligation could not be enlarged to require service in a particular division or railway where the appointment terms did not impose that restriction and no applicable Railway-wide direction establishing it was produced.

The ICF circular restricting transfers for ten years applied to ICF employees and did not govern this applicant.

The appointment documents required ten years’ service in the Scouts and Guides organisation, but did not state that the service had to be rendered in Trivandrum Division or Southern Railway.

Although the applicant remained bound by the ten-year service obligation despite the omitted bond, the Railway could not add a division-specific non-transfer condition that was absent from the governing terms. The ICF circular did not supply that restriction because it applied to ICF employees, and the respondents produced no corresponding direction applicable to the applicant.

The applicant was directed to execute a bond undertaking to serve the Scouts and Guides organisation for ten years from his appointment, without restriction as to division or railway. Upon execution, the respondents were directed to issue fresh relieving orders within three days.

No order as to costs was made.