SRINAGAR: In a sharp rebuke to what it termed “substantially identical and stereotyped reasoning,” the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT), Srinagar Bench, has pulled up the Director School Education Kashmir (DSEK) for mechanically rejecting a divorcee teacher’s plea for continued deployment in Bandipora, ruling that humanitarian concerns cannot be dismissed through formulaic administrative decision-making.
Tabasum Ara, 45, a Teacher Grade-II originally engaged under the Rehbar-e-Taleem (ReT) Scheme in the remote Gurez zone, through her counsel Advocate Ishtiyaq Ahmad Mir, challenged Order No. 143-DSEK of 2026, which directed her repatriation to Gurez despite her status as a divorcee and sole caregiver to four minor school-going children and her aged, medically infirm mother.
A single-member Bench comprising Justice Ritu Tagore, Member (Judicial), observed that while transfer is ordinarily an incident of service, administrative discretion is not “absolute or unfettered” and must be exercised in a “fair, humane, and reasonable” manner.
The Tribunal found that the Directorate of School Education Kashmir (DSEK) had rejected Tabasum’s representation in a “wholly mechanical manner” without undertaking any “meaningful balancing exercise between public interest and humanitarian considerations.”
Applicant’s counsel, Advocate Ishtiyaq Ahmad Mir, had earlier secured relief from the Tribunal in a previous round of litigation (O.A. No. 216/2026), wherein the authorities were directed to treat her plea as a representation and pass a speaking and reasoned order. However, upon examining the fresh rejection, the Bench noted that a comparative reading of similar orders revealed that “substantially identical and stereotyped reasoning” had been adopted in such cases.
“A comparative reading of the said orders prima facie reveals that substantially identical and stereotyped reasoning appears to have been adopted in all such cases while rejecting the representations… where this Tribunal had specifically directed meaningful consideration… the competent authority was expected to independently examine the distinct factual circumstances,” the Bench noted.
The Tribunal stressed that a valid speaking order “necessarily requires due consideration of the specific contentions projected by the affected employee,” adding that mere reproduction of departmental policy cannot substitute genuine application of mind.
The order further stated that the State, as a model employer, is expected to act with empathy and compassion while dealing with employees facing exceptional personal hardship, particularly where minor children, dependent parents and the absence of social support structures are involved.
Setting aside the April 10, 2026 order, the Tribunal directed the authorities to reconsider Tabasum’s case afresh within four weeks, specifically taking into account her status as a divorcee employee, the welfare and educational continuity of her children, the medical dependency of her mother and the possibility of balancing administrative requirements with humanitarian considerations.
While refraining from expressing any final opinion on the merits of the transfer itself, the CAT made it clear that the fresh decision must be taken independently, strictly in accordance with law and based on meaningful consideration rather than mechanical repetition. (KDC)
