Bombay High Court
AMITI RAMGOPAL AGRAWALversusUNION TERRITORY OF DADRA AND NAGAR HAVELI AND DAMAN AND DIU AND ORS
- Decided
- Disposal
- Disposed Off
Holding
The petition is dismissed and the petitioner is directed to approach the Central Administrative Tribunal.
Summary
The petitioner, an employee of the Union Territory of Dadra & Nagar Haveli and Daman & Diu, challenged an order dated 15 March 2024 that transferred his services to Diu. He filed a writ petition in the Bombay High Court seeking relief from the transfer. The Court noted the Supreme Court's decision in L. Chandra Kumar v. Union of India and observed that the transfer issue had previously been raised before the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT). Accordingly, the Court held that the appropriate forum for adjudicating the grievance is the CAT, not the High Court. The petition was dismissed with liberty granted to the petitioner to approach the CAT, and all contentions were kept open. No costs were awarded.
Issues considered
- Whether the High Court has jurisdiction to entertain a challenge to the transfer of a government employee.
- Whether the petitioner should approach the Central Administrative Tribunal for relief.
- Applicability of the Supreme Court's decision in L. Chandra Kumar v. Union of India to the present transfer order.
Subjects
- service transfer
- administrative law
- jurisdiction
- Central Administrative Tribunal
- writ petition
- L. Chandra Kumar
Judgment
Digitally
signed by
PRASHANT
PRASHANT VILAS RANE
VILAS
RANE Date:
27.DOC
2026.08.28
12:03:14
+0530
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO. 19191 OF 2024
Amiti Ramgopal Agrawal ...Petitioner
Versus
Union Territory of Dadra & Nagar Haveli
& Daman & Diu & Ors.. ...Respondents
_______
Mr. Rushabh N. Chaurasia with Pranit L. Pawar i/b. Chetan Arvind Alai, for Petitioner.
Mr. Harsh Dedhia, for Respondents.
_________
CORAM: G. S. KULKARNI &
Dr.NEELA GOKHALE, JJ.
DATE: 25 AUGUST 2026.
P.C.
1. The petitioner is an employee of the Union Territory of Dadra & Nagar
Haveli & Daman and Diu. He is aggrieved by the order dated 15 March 2024,
whereby his services have been transferred to Diu.
2. In view of the decision of the Supreme Court in L. Chandra Kumar v.
Union of India1, and considering the fact that the transfer of employee was
challenged before the Central Administrative Tribunal even on an earlier
occasion, the appropriate course for the petitioner would be to approach the
Central Administrative Tribunal.
3. We accordingly dismiss the petition, with liberty to the petitioner to
approach the Central Administrative Tribunal.
4. All contentions of the parties are expressly kept open.
5. Disposed of. No costs.
(Dr.NEELA GOKHALE, J.) (G. S. KULKARNI, J.)
1 AIR 1997 SC 1125
Page 1 of 1
25 August 2026
P.V.Rane
Checking your session…