Dr. Shailendra Kumar vs Union Of India And 5 Ors
2022 Latest Caselaw 2193 Gua

                                                                 Page No.# 1/4

GAHC010097542022




                      THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
  (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

                         Case No. : WP(C)/3400/2022

         DR. SHAILENDRA KUMAR
         COMDT, S/O- LATE JAGESHWAR PRASAD SHAH, CH CRPF, AMERIGOG,
         GUWAHATI, ASSAM, PIN- 781022.



         VERSUS

         UNION OF INDIA AND 5 ORS.
         THROUGH ITS HOME SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS,
         GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, NORTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI-110001.

         2:THE HOME SECRETARY

          MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS
          GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
          NORTH BLOCK
          NEW DELHI-110001.

         3:DIRECTOR GENERAL

          DIRECTORATE GENERAL ASSAM RIFLES
          SHILLONG-793010.

         4:DIRECTOR GENERAL
          DIRECTORATE GENERAL
          CENTRAL RESERVE POLICE FORCE
          BLOCK NO. 1
          C.G.O. COMPLEX
          LODHI ROAD
          NEW DELHI-110003.

         5:ADDL. DIRECTOR GENERAL (MED.)
                                                                        Page No.# 2/4

             (CAPFS
             NSG AND AR)
             WEST BLOCK-1
             WING-3
             LEVEL-2
             R.K. PURAM
             NEW DELHI-110066.

            6:IG (MED)/MS
             COMPOSITE HOSPITAL
             CENTRAL RESERVE POLICE FORCE
             GUWAHATI
            ASSAM
             PIN- 781023

Advocate for the Petitioner   : MR. R MAZUMDAR

Advocate for the Respondent : ASSTT.S.G.I.




                                 BEFORE
            HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ACHINTYA MALLA BUJOR BARUA

                                             ORDER

Date : 24.06.2022

Heard Mr. R. Mazumdar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. A.K. Dutta, learned CGC for the respondents in the in the Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India as well as the authorities in the Assam Rifles.

Issue notice returnable by 6 weeks.

Extra copies within 3 days.

The petitioner who is serving as a General Duty Medical Officer in the Assam Rifles was transferred from CH AR, Shukhovi, Nagaland to CH CRPF, Guwahati. Subsequently, by another order dated 21.10.2021, under the Inter Force Transfer/Posting, the petitioner upon completion Page No.# 3/4

of his normal tenure of 3 years was required to be repatriated to the Assam Rifles due to acute shortage of medical officers. Subsequent thereof, by the order dated 15.02.2022 of Lt. Col., AMS, DG Assam Rifles, the petitioner was ordered to be posted at ARCH, Shukhovi. Aggrieved, this writ petition is instituted.

The petitioner relies upon a policy guideline of the Ministry of Home Affairs which, inter alia, provides that the annual transfers of Specialist Medical Officers and GDMOs having PG qualification would be decided by committee comprising of as extracted below:

   "Secretary/Special Secretary/         -     Chairman
   Additional Secretary, MHA
   DsG BSF, CRPF, ITBP, SSB & AR         -     Members
   Or their representative

   ADG(Med)                              -     Member Secy.

Note:- As CISF has a common cadre with ITBP and NSG is a deputationist force, there is no representative from these forces in the Committee."

The petitioner has raised an issue that the aforesaid procedure prescribed under the policy had not been followed in issuing the transfers orders indicated above.

Mr. A.K. Dutta, learned CGC submits that in a similar writ petition which was before the Hon'ble Manipur High Court, the respondents in the Union of India had produced a document which showed that the aforesaid policy had not been implemented in the Assam Rifles. The Hon'ble Manipur High Court through its judgment dated 07.02.2022 in WP(C) No. 404/2021 had taken note of the aforesaid instruction of the Union of India and in paragraph 19 thereof, arrived at its conclusion that the transfer policy was given its effect and accordingly, interfered with Page No.# 4/4

the order of transfer.

In view of the above prima facie case being made until further order, the orders of transfer impugned dated 21.10.2021 and 15.02.2021, remain stayed. The respondents may file their affidavit and the issue as to whether the policy of transfer referred above had been implemented or not would be decided. Considering the factor that we have stayed the order of transfer on the premises that some policy had been implemented and the question remains as to whether actually the policy had been implemented or not, an endeavour shall be made to give a final consideration on the next date of hearing. The respondents in the meantime to file their affidavit bringing on record all relevant materials they intend to rely upon for deciding the issue. In the interim, it is also provided that the if matter of transfer of the petitioner is decided by the committee which is referred herein above, liberty remains with the respondents to do the needful if so advised.

JUDGE

Comparing Assistant