Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Ravi Shankar Kumar vs Union Of India & Ors on 12 July, 2022
39
12.07.2022
Ct. No.23
pg.
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION
APPELLATE SIDE
WPA 14880 of 2022
Ravi Shankar Kumar
Vs.
Union of India & Ors.
Mr. Arunava Ghosh
Mr. Puspal Chakraborty
Ms. Prisanka Ganguly
... For the petitioner
Mr. Indrajeet Dasgupta
Ms. Rima Biswas
... For Union of India
Affidavit of service filed in Court today is taken on
record.
The petitioner is presently officiating as the
Commandant, 207-CoBRA Battalion of the Central Reserve
Police Force under Central Zone, West Bengal Sector,
Commando Battalion for Resolute Action (in short
"CoBRA"). The petitioner was served with a transfer order
on 15th June, 2020 by and under which he was transferred
from 119 Battalion to 207 CoBRA wherein he is presently
posted. The petitioner accepted such transfer order and is
working thereat. The petitioner says that under the
transfer policy dated 24th November, 2014, in case of
officers serving as Assistant Commandant to DIG in
CoBRA, the period after which one can be transferred is
four years. The petitioner has been now served with a
2
transfer order dated 30th June, 2022 by which he has been
transferred from 207 CoBRA to GC KKT. The petitioner
says that this transfer order has been issued prior to
expiry of four years period in his present posting wherein
he joined in 2020. The petitioner further says that the
transfer order is contrary to the provisions of Rule 109 of
the Central Reserve Police Force Rules, 1955. The
petitioner also alleges that as per the subsisting transfer
policy, the time schedule for Summer Chain Transfer (in
short "SCT") in case of officers in the rank of that of the
petitioner is 1st March of a particular year. The transfer
order dated 30th June, 2022 is, admittedly, much beyond
1st March, 2022. The petitioner also says that he has
certain inconveniences in the family affairs for which it is
not possible for him to accept the transfer order. Out of his
two daughters, the elder daughter is presently pursuing
MBBS (1st year) at Muzzafarpur (Bihar) and the younger
daughter studying in 12th standard at Salboni, West
Bengal. The younger daughter will appear at the 10+2
Board examination in March/April, 2023. It will be very
inconvenient for the petitioner to move out of his present
posting before March/April, 2023. The petitioner further
says that he has no objection if he is transferred on or
after March/April, 2023. The petitioner also says that by
dint of the transfer, the petitioner will lose about
Rs.25,000/- per month and relies upon a document
annexed at page 42 of the writ petition for this purpose.
3
The intervention to transfer policy can be only on a
limited ground as it pertains to smooth administration and
is considered to be a policy matter left with the employer.
However, in the instant case, I find that the petitioner has
been able to make out a prima facie ground for
scrutinising his transfer order.
After hearing the parties and considering the
materials on record, I find that the matter can be disposed
of by a final hearing after calling for affidavits or by
directing the respondent no.2 to whom the petitioner has
made a representation on 3rd July, 2022 to consider the
same within a time frame.
Although the petitioner has relied upon an interim
order passed by the High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and
Ladakh at Srinagar in WP (C) No.1429 of 2022 with CM
No.3443 of 2022 (Manoj Kumar v. Union of India & Ors.)
dated 4th July, 2022 which the petitioner says to have been
passed in a similar situation, but I find the judgment of
this Court reported in 2018 SCC OnLine Cal 4765 (Sheel
Nidhi Jha v. Union of India & Ors.) to be more acceptable.
Considering the ratio laid down in the judgment of
Sheel Nidhi Jha (supra), I direct the respondent no.2,
being the Director General, Central Reserve Police Force, to
consider the petitioner's representation dated 3rd July,
2022 and pass a reasoned order after affording the
petitioner a reasonable opportunity of hearing as
expeditiously as possible but not beyond three months
from date. Till one month after disposal of the petitioner's
representation, the transfer order dated 30th June, 2022
shall remain in abeyance so far it relates to the petitioner.
The respondents shall make necessary arrangement to
retain the petitioner at his present posting till the time as
mentioned hereinabove.
The parties, including the respondent no.2, shall
act on the basis of a server copy of this order duly
downloaded from the official website of this Court without
insisting upon production of a certified copy thereof.
Nothing further remains to be adjudicated in this
writ petition. The same is disposed of accordingly without
any order as to costs.
Since I have not called for any affidavits,
allegations made in the writ petition are deemed to have
not been admitted by the respondents.
Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if
applied for, be given to the parties, upon compliance of
necessary formalities.
(Arindam Mukherjee, J.)
