Pending administrative consideration of transfer representations, employee relief from relieving orders is permissible.

The applicant, a Social Security Officer in the Employees State Insurance Corporation (ESIC), was posted at the Regional Office in Kanpur since 2015

On 10.04.2026, she was transferred to the Deputy Regional Office in Durgapur, West Bengal, followed by a relieving order on 17.04.2026

The applicant submitted a representation on 10.04.2026 citing personal grievances, including her own chronic medical conditions (migraine and minor thalassemia), the care of aged and ailing parents, her daughter’s education, and her lack of proficiency in the Bengali language

Claiming the transfer violated guidelines and failed to consider her compassionate circumstances, she approached the Tribunal seeking to quash the orders and a direction for the respondents to decide her representation

1. Whether the respondent authorities are obligated to consider and decide an employee's representation against a transfer order based on personal, medical, and family hardships before giving effect to such transfer.

2. Whether the applicant is entitled to interim protection from the transfer and relieving orders pending the disposal of her representation.

The court examined the administrative principles governing transfers within statutory bodies, specifically the ESIC transfer policy dated 18.12.2024

The court relied on the doctrine of administrative fairness, which requires competent authorities to consider grievances and representations filed by employees regarding "compassionate circumstances" and "personal hardships" before finalizing administrative actions like transfers

It also noted the principle that while a post may be transferable, the authority must adhere to its own transfer guidelines and pay due regard to the medical and family dependencies of the employee

The Tribunal observed that the applicant had raised substantive personal and medical grounds—including serious ailments and the dependency of her minor child and elderly parents—which the respondents appeared to have ignored

While the respondents argued that the transfer was made on administrative grounds and that the applicant had a long tenure of over ten years in Kanpur, the Tribunal found that the failure to decide the applicant's representation dated 10.04.2026 necessitated judicial intervention

The court reasoned that justice would be served by ensuring the executive authority performs its duty to pass a "reasoned and speaking order" on the pending grievance, rather than the court substituting its own judgment on the merits of the transfer at this stage

It directed the competent authority to decide the applicant’s representation dated 10.04.2026 by passing a reasoned and speaking order in accordance with the law within six weeks of receiving the order

Crucially, the Tribunal ordered that "no coercive action shall be taken" against the applicant pursuant to the transfer and relieving orders until the representation is decided