Tribunal permits withdrawal of transfer challenge with liberty to pursue remedies in accordance with law.

The applicant, an Office Superintendent posted in New Delhi, challenged the transfer order dated 22 July 2026 transferring him from Delhi to Mumbai.

He had previously filed O.A. No. 2823/2026 concerning the same transfer order. That application was disposed of on 31 July 2026 with a direction to the respondents to consider and decide his representation dated 27 July 2026 by a reasoned and speaking order, in accordance with law, within thirty days of receipt of the Tribunal’s order.

The applicant alleged that the respondents had not complied with those directions and that he was likely to be transferred pursuant to a relieving order dated 4 August 2026, under which he was relieved from his New Delhi posting with effect from 31 August 2026 (forenoon).

During the hearing, the applicant sought permission to withdraw the present O.A. with liberty to pursue his grievances in accordance with law.

1. Whether the applicant should be permitted to withdraw the O.A. concerning the impugned transfer order, with liberty to agitate his grievances in accordance with law.

2. Whether the Tribunal should adjudicate the alleged non-compliance with its earlier directions dated 31 July 2026 in the present O.A.

The Tribunal applied the procedural principle that an applicant may be permitted to withdraw proceedings, particularly where the applicant seeks liberty to pursue an appropriate remedy in accordance with law.

The Tribunal also preserved the effect of its earlier order dated 31 July 2026, which required the respondents to decide the applicant’s representation through a reasoned and speaking order within the stipulated period.

No statutory provision or judicial precedent was cited, and the Tribunal did not adjudicate the merits of the transfer or the alleged non-compliance.

The Tribunal noted that the present O.A. arose from the same transfer order that had already been challenged in O.A. No. 2823/2026.

Although the applicant alleged that the earlier direction had not been complied with and that he had been relieved from his Delhi posting, he ultimately sought withdrawal of the proceedings with liberty to pursue an appropriate remedy.

The Tribunal accepted that request and therefore did not examine the legality of the transfer, the adequacy of the respondents’ compliance, or the applicant’s substantive grievances.

The connected miscellaneous applications, if any, were also disposed of, and no order as to costs was made.