Anil Kumar K vs Union Of India

Kerala High Court

Anil Kumar K vs Union Of India on 21 May, 2024

Author: Sathish Ninan

Bench: Sathish Ninan

              IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                              PRESENT
              THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATHISH NINAN
    TUESDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF MAY 2024 / 31ST VAISAKHA, 1946
                      WP(C) NO. 18284 OF 2024
PETITIONER:

          ANIL KUMAR K.,
          AGED 52 YEARS
          NO.914520993, HC/GUARD, CISF UNIT, BPCL, KOCHI, PIN
          - 682031
          BY ADVS.
          A.DINESH RAO
          YOHAAN KAITHARA XAVIER


RESPONDENTS:

    1     UNION OF INDIA
          REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF HOME
          AFFAIRS, NORTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI, PIN - 110001
    2     THE DIRECTOR GENERAL
          CENTRAL INDUSTRIAL SECURITY FORCE, CISF HQ, CGO
          COMPLEX, LODHI ROAD, NEW DELHI, PIN: 110 003., PIN -
          110003
    3     THE INSPECTOR GENERAL/ CISF,
          SOUTH SECTOR HEAD QUARTERS, CHPT CAMPUS, CHENNAI,
          PIN - 600013
    4     THE DEPUTY INSPECTOR GENERAL/CISF,
          CISF SOUTH ZONE HEAD QUARTERS, RAJAJI BHAVAN, BASANT
          NAGAR, CHENNAI,, PIN - 600090
    5     THE GROUP COMMANDANT,
          CISF GROUP HEAD QUARTERS, KENDRIYA BHAVAN, KAKKANAD,
          ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682030
    6     THE DEPUTY COMMANDANT
          CISF-BPCL-KR, IRUMPANAM P.O, ERNAKULAM,, PIN -
          682309

          BY CGC
     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
21.05.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
                        Sathish Ninan, J.
                    ----------------------
                    WP(C) No.18284 of 2024
                   ------------------------
             Dated this the 21st day of May, 2024

                             JUDGMENT

By way of this writ petition, the petitioner challenges Ext.P8 and P11 orders to the extent the petitioner is ordered be transferred to BRBNML NNP SALBONI.

2. The petitioner was posted to the CISF Unit attached to the BPCL, Kochi on 30.05.2023. While so working, Ext.P8 order of promotion and transfer was issued.

3. Challenging Ext.P8 to the extent it related to transfer, the petitioner approached this Court in WP(c) No.12212 of 2024. The ground urged was the medical condition of his wife. It was contended that he was attached to the CISF Unit of UIDAI Bangalore and it was on his request for transfer on the medical grounds of his wife that he was granted a transfer to the BPCL, WP(C) No.18284/24 -: 2 :- Kochi. The said medical grounds still subsist. Not even one year has elapsed since transfer. There are vacancies available to accommodate the petitioner. It was alleged that Ext.P8 order of transfer was passed without considering the above facts. This Court as per Ext.P9 judgment directed the appropriate authority to consider the petitioner's request for retention in the present station on the aforesaid grounds.

4. Pursuant to the directions of this Court, the appropriate authority passed Ext.P11 order affirming the orders of transfer. Challenging the same the petitioner had now approached this Court.

5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Central Government Counsel appearing for the respondents.

6. Perusal of Ext.P11 order shows that, but for a narration at paragraph 3 therein, of the grounds urged by the petitioner before this Court which were directed WP(C) No.18284/24 -: 3 :- to be considered by the appropriate authority, there is no consideration of the said grounds in the order. Ext.P11 order states that the orders of transfer is necessitated due to the low panel merit of the petitioner. However the medical grounds as stated earlier and based on which the petitioner was granted a transfer to BPCL, Kochi is not considered at all. It is so in spite of the direction of this Court in Ext.P9 judgment. Evidently, the directions of this Court in Ext.P9 judgment has not been complied with. It is for the authority to pass fresh orders on the petitioner's request in compliance with the directions given in Ext.P9 with specific reference to the grounds raised therein.

Resultantly, Ext.P11 order is quashed. The 2nd respondent or other appropriate authority will re- consider the petitioner's claim and pass fresh orders with regard to the transfer of the petitioner. The WP(C) No.18284/24 -: 4 :- learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has not been relieved from the present place. If the petitioner has not been served with the movement order, he shall be permitted to continue till orders are passed as above. It is made clear that the orders in so far as it relates to promotion remains intact.

Sd/-

Sathish Ninan, Judge SVP WP(C) No.18284/24 -: 5 :- APPENDIX OF WP(C) 18284/2024 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P 1 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRSENTATION DATED 10.5.23 SUBMITTED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT Exhibit p2 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER ISSUED BY THE DEPUTY COMMANDANT OF CISF UNIT, UIDAI BANGALORE AND DATED 29/05/2023 Exhibit p3 TRUE COPY OF THE MEDICAL CERTIFICATE DATED 18/03/2024 ISSUED BY DR. CHETHANA DHARMAPALAIAH, DEPARTMENT OF RHEUMATOLOGY, ASTER CMS HOSPITALS Exhibit p 4 TRUE COPY OF THE SERVICE ORDER PART-1 (NO.30/2024) DATED 12/03/2024 ISSUED BY THE 2 ND RESPONDENT Exhibit p 5 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 13/03/2024 SUBMITTED TO THE 2 ND RESPONDENT Exhibit p6 TRUE COPY OF THE RECOMMENDATION FORWARDED BY THE 6 TH RESPONDENT TO THE 5 TH RESPONDENT Exhibit p 7 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER THROUGH E- MAIL TO THE 2 ND RESPONDENT AND DATED 17/03/2024 Exhibit p 8 TRUE COPY OF THE PROMOTION- CUM-POSTING ORDER ISSUED BY THE2 ND RESPONDENTAND DATED 19/03/2024 Exhibit p9 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WPC 12212/2024 DATED 25.03.2024 Exhibit p 10 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 01.4.2024 Exhibit p11 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 15.5.24 RECEIVED BY THE PETITIONER ON 18.5.2024 Exhibit p12 TRUE COPY OF THE CIRCULAR NO 22/2017 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT AND DATED 25.9.2017