Administrative transfers should generally be deferred until the completion of the children’s current academic session.

The applicant, a Scientist-D (Hydrogeology) with the Central Ground Water Board (CGWB), was transferred from Guwahati to Raipur, Chhattisgarh, vide an order dated March 13, 2024

The applicant had served in the North-East Region since 2002, with a brief stint in Shillong between 2020 and 2022 before returning to Guwahati

He challenged the transfer on the grounds that it occurred during the mid-academic session of his daughter, a B.A. Psychology student in Guwahati, and that it constituted hostile discrimination as other scientists with longer tenures at the station were not moved

The applicant submitted a representation on March 18, 2024, which remained pending

During proceedings, the applicant produced evidence of his daughter's selection at the Tata Institute of Social Sciences to underscore the academic disruption

1. Whether the impugned transfer order was liable to be quashed for violating the settled legal principle against transfers during a mid-academic session

2. Whether the respondents should be directed to consider the applicant’s pending representation seeking a deferment of the transfer on compassionate and academic grounds

The Tribunal primarily relied upon the principle established by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Director of School Education v. O. Kuruppa Thevan [1994 Supp (2) SCC 666], which mandates that administrative transfers should generally not be effected during the mid-academic session of an employee’s children to avoid educational disruption

The applicant further invoked Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India regarding the alleged hostile discrimination and arbitrary nature of the transfer

The Tribunal observed that the timing of the transfer interfered with the daughter’s ongoing university semester and subsequent admission into a new institute

By applying the Supreme Court's protection of academic continuity to the facts—specifically the daughter's 4th-semester status and her merit list ranking at a new institute—the Tribunal determined that the respondents were required to give the applicant's representation a sympathetic review rather than enforcing an immediate relocation

The respondents are directed to consider the applicant’s representation dated March 18, 2024, "sympathetically," treating the O.A. as part of the representation

The consideration must specifically account for the Supreme Court's ruling in O. Kuruppa Thevan and the evidence regarding the daughter’s academic selection

This exercise must be completed within six weeks from the date of receipt of the order