Allahabad High Court
Sangeeta Yadav vs State Of U.P.Thru.Prin.Secy. ... on 16 March, 2021
Bench: Chandra Dhari Singh
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Court No. - 20
Case :- SERVICE SINGLE No. - 7073 of 2021
Petitioner :- Sangeeta Yadav
Respondent :- State Of U.P.Thru.Prin.Secy. Home & Ors.
Counsel for Petitioner :- M.P. Raju
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Chandra Dhari Singh,J.
Heard Sri M.P. Raju, learned counsel for the petitioner and Dr. Ran Vijay Singh, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State-respondents.
The case set-forth by learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner has been transferred from District Lucknow to Rae Bareli vide order dated 26.04.2018 but after more than two years, she has been sought to be relieved vide order dated 06.09.2020, which is in derogation of the provisions of Para-523 of Uttar Pradesh Police Regulations.
As per para-523 of the Police Regulations, all the employees who have been transferred should be relieved by the Competent Authority within ten days.
Sri Raju has further referred order of this Court dated 11.11.2016 passed in Writ Petition No.26462 (S/S) of 2016, which reads as under:-
"Heard learned counsel for parties.
All the writ petitions have been clubbed together as the issue involved in these petitions is the same as to whether the authority was justified in relieving the petitioners after two years of the transfer order having been passed. The transfer order in all cases were passed in the year 2014, inspite of it, on account of administrative exigencies, the need for adequate number of personnel at Lucknow, which is the State capital, they could not be relieved. Normally considering the lapse of time the appropriate course for the respondents was to re-consider the matter and pass a fresh order of transfer as has been held by this Court in the judgment dated 6.07.2016 passed in writ petition no. 15148 (SS) of 2016 which has been followed by a co-ordinate bench in writ petition no. 15961 (SS) of 2016, therefore only for this reason while granting liberty to the respondents to have a fresh look at the matter and pass a fresh order expeditiously say within a period of 2 weeks, the impugned orders are hereby quashed.
All the writ petitions stand disposed of in the aforesaid terms."
On the basis of the aforesaid order being passed by this Court, Sri Raju has submitted that the impugned relieving order of the petitioner is not only in violation of para-523 of the Police Regulations, but such type of exercise has been condemned by this Court in identical writ petition vide order dated 11.11.2016 (supra).
Learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel has submitted that as per provision of para-523 of the Police Regulations is concerned, it should be endeavour of the police authorities to relieve the police officers at the earliest in terms of para-523 of the Police Regulations, but sometimes due to administrative exigencies those persons could not be relieved with promptness.
Be that as it may, since there is statutory prescription for relieving of a police officer within a period of ten days and this Court has condemned the delayed relieving of the police officers in various orders being passed by this Court in identical matter, therefore, the instant writ petition is disposed of finally quashing the impugned orders dated 26.04.2018 and 06.09.2020, so far as it relates to the petitioner, however, with liberty to the opposite parties to pass a fresh order of transfer, if exigency of service so requires, strictly in accordance with law and the transfer policy, particularly considering the aspect of mid session.
Order Date :- 16.3.2021
nishant/-
