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,
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
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
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
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
