Judgment :- Ramachandran Nair, J. The order under challenge is the one issued by Central Administrative Tribunal declining respondent's entitlement for a posting as Station Master Gr.III in Shornur. Though the order was issued by railways posting respondent in Shornur on 1.4.2009, the same was later cancelled which was the order challenged before the Central Administrative Tribunal and cancelled by them. Before us counsel for the railways submitted that the transfer given to the respondent from Panambur to Shornur is under a mistake with regard to the entitlement to the respondent for transfer. However, what is clear from the sequence of events is that, the respondent served in a place called Mavelipalayam in Tamil Nadu which was within the Trichi division. He requested for an inter division transfer and opted three places, Shoranur, Karakkad and Pattambi in Palghat division. The respondent's request was made in 2003 with the railways in which he was rank No:3 in the list of applicants for inter division transfer and posting. Admittedly based on an earlier CAT order respondent was shifted to Palakkad division and posted in a place called Panambur where he was a station master. This happened after the new Salem division was formed which was made up with part of the Palakkad, Trichi and Madurai divisions. The railway does not contest the inter division transfer given to the respondent based on his request made earlier and in terms of the CAT order. However, what is sought to be cancelled is the transfer of the respondent from Panambur to Shornur made by Ext.A9 and which was later cancelled by Ext.A1. Under the modified order respondent was retained in Panambur itself. However, admittedly nobody is posted to the post in Shornur to which respondent was transferred based on his original request. The case of the railways is that the respondent after availing the benefit of inter division transfer cannot continue to retain his option in terms of his original request made in 2003. We do not find any force in the contention of the railways because inter division transfer granted to respondent is acceptable to them. The balance is only posting of the respondent from one place to another within the same division which probably was originally done based on his request made in 2003. We do not find any force in the contention of the railways because inter division transfer granted to respondent is acceptable to them. The balance is only posting of the respondent from one place to another within the same division which probably was originally done based on his request made in 2003. We are not told by the railways that there is any other applicant who was superior claim over the respondent for the posting in Shornur. In the circumstances we do not find any merit in the writ petition filed. We accordingly uphold the order of the CAT. Since counsel for the railways has requested for two months time we grant the same but on specific condition that the post to which respondent was originally transferred at Shornur which is lying vacant shall not be filled up even on a stop gap arrangement until he is shifted.