Allahabad High Court
Pradeep Kumar Pno No. 142430215 vs State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Prin. ... on 18 August, 2022
Bench: Alok Mathur
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Court No. - 8
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 4999 of 2022
Petitioner :- Pradeep Kumar Pno No. 142430215
Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Home Lko. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- M.P. Raju
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Alok Mathur,J.
Heard Shri M.P. Raju, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel on behalf of opposite parties.
By means of the present petition the petitioner has assailed the order of transfer dated 30.5.2022, passed by the Deputy Supdt of Police (Adhishthan), Fire Services Headquarter, Lucknow on behalf of Director General of Police, Fire Services, Fire Headquarter, Uttar Pradesh, Lucknow whereby transferring the petitioner from District Kheri to District Sitapur.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has assailed the said order on the ground that petitioner being a Class-IV employee cannot be transferred outside the district. In support of his submission learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon Rule 21 (3) of the U.P. Police Group-D Employees Service Rules, 2009 whereby only under special circumstances, i.e., administrative ground or self request, a Group- D employee may be transferred by the competent police establishment board.
He submits that in the impugned order neither there is any such recital that the said order has been passed on self request or on administrative ground and, hence, submits that the said transfer order dehors Rules of 2009.
Learned Standing Counsel on the basis of instructions has submitted that the said transfer has been made by the police establishment board which was especially constituted for transfer of the Class- IV employees of Fire Services. He further submits that there was administrative necessity of persons like petitioner looking into the vacancies in various police stations and, hence, the said order has been passed.
We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
Rule 21 (3) of the U.P. Police Group- D Employee Service Rules is as under : -
"21 (3). A person appointed to a post for a particular district or PAC Battalion or unit shall not be transferred to any other establishment in normal case.
Under special circumstances, i.e., administrative ground or self request, a group D employee may be transferred by the competent Police Establishment Board."
According to the said rule, the transfer can be made only on the administrative ground or on self request. This aspect of the matter has also been considered by a co-ordinate bench of this Court in judgment dated 08.01.2016 passed in Writ Petition No.3800 (SS) of 2015 [Ravindra Nath Ram vs. State of U.P. & Others] which is quoted as under :-
"Heard.
The petitioner is a Class IV employee in the Economic Offences Wing, Department of U.P. Police. He has been transferred vide order 24.4.2015 from Lucknow to Azamgarh.
Rule 21(3) of the relevant rules known as U.P. Police Group D Employees Service Rules 2009 was amended by the Ist amendment, 2014, which reads as under:
"21(3). A person appointed to a post for a particular district or P.A.C. Battalion or unit shall not be transferred to any other establishment in normal case.
Under special circumstances i.e. administrative ground or self request, a group 'D' employee may be transferred by competent police Establishment Board."
Under the said amended rule transfer of a Class IV employee of the police department is permissible only on administrative ground or on his own request, and not in normal course. This issue came up before this court in Writ Petition No.6525(SS) of 2015 and it was held as under:
".....Under the said Rule, transfer of a Class IV employee is permissible only on administrative ground or on his own request. ..... Administrative ground, as is normally understood, is a case where there are complaints against the functioning of an employee which are required to be inquired. His continuance at the said place may prejudice such inquiry or may not be in administrative interest keeping in mind the sensitive nature of duties.
.........
The petitioner is presently posted at Lucknow and his family is living in an official accommodation. He is a low-paid employee and his children are studying in school at Lucknow. In these circumstances, his transfer in mid-academic session causes extreme hardship to him. Even otherwise, the order of transfer, impugned herein, cannot be said to be in accordance with Rule 21(3) of the Rules. Transfer in public interest is normally done keeping in mind administrative need and exigencies in a routine manner as per the prevalent transfer policy, normally within the transfer season and it is from transfer on administrative ground or on request. The words "public interest" have been specifically omitted from being used by the rule making authority in Rule 21(3), therefore, the intention of the rule making authority is very clear that transfer of Group D employees of the Police shall be made only on administrative ground or on his request."
The petitioner herein has been transferred in public interest, i.e. in normal course, which is different from transfer on administrative ground or own request. The Rule 21(3) does not permit such transfer in normal course in public interest. Transfer of a Group D employee such as the petitioner can only be made only under special circumstances, i.e. on administrative ground or self request by the competent Police Establishment Board. No such special circumstance has been mentioned in the transfer order nor has any such circumstance been mentioned in the counter affidavit. Therefore, the impugned transfer order (Annexure-1 to the writ petition) can not be sustained. Same is accordingly quashed. Consequences to follow as per law.
As the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner did not join at the transferred place, it is provided that the petitioner shall move an application for treating the said period i.e. from the date of passing of the order of transfer till the date of joining back at Lucknow as on leave and the said application shall be considered by the competent authority keeping in mind that the transfer order was illegally passed. The petitioner shall be allowed to join back at Lucknow within one week.
With the aforesaid observations/directions this writ petition is disposed of."
Considering the facts of the present case and the judgment of the co-ordinate bench as quoted above, it is noticed that the prima-facie services of the petitioner ordinarily could not be transferred to another district.
Matter requires consideration.
Let counter affidavit be filed by the learned Standing Counsel within four weeks. Two weeks' time thereafter is allowed to the learned counsel for the petitioner for filing rejoinder affidavit.
List in the third week of October, 2022.
Till the next date of listing impugned order dated 30.5.2022 shall remain stayed with regard to the petitioner. It is further directed that the petitioner shall be entitled to continue to work at his previous place of posting.
Order Date :- 18.8.2022
mks
