Allahabad High Court
Rishi Kumar vs State Of U.P. And 4 Others on 6 July, 2022
Author: Sangeeta Chandra
Bench: Sangeeta Chandra
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 33 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 9310 of 2022 Petitioner :- Rishi Kumar Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Atipriya Gautam,Sr. Advocate,Vinod Kumar Mishra Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Mrs. Sangeeta Chandra,J.
1. Heard.
2. This petition has been filed challenging the order dated 24.05.2022 passed by the Additional Superintendent of Police (Establishment/ Karmik), DGP Headquarters, Signature Building, Gomti Nagar, Lucknow, transferring the petitioner from Civil Police Agra to GRP Lucknow on the ground that the same has been passed in violation of the transfer policy and without any willingness being shown by the petitioner.
3. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that by a Circular dated 14.11.2015 issued by the DGP Headquarters, U.P., Lucknow, asking for nomination of incumbent for transfer from Civil Police to GRP, only such nominations had to be sent of persons who were willing to get transferred. Similarly in the Circular dated 06.04.2017 also willingness of the incumbent alone would entitle the State Respondents to transfer such personnel from Civil Police to the GRP. The nominations that have been sent by the I.G. Agra Range has been sent without seeking willingness of the petitioner as the respondent has not sought any consent. A perusal of the impugned transfer order would show that transfer has been done without any administrative exigency or public interest therefore, the same is liable to be quashed by this Court. Additionally, the petitioner has pleaded that petitioner's mother is aged about 65 years and she is suffering from Arthritis and the petitioner's wife is suffering from paralysis attack on the left side of the body and is undergoing treatment at Agra. Moreover, the transfer has been made in mid academic session causing undue hardship to the petitioner whose children are studying in St. George School Agra.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance upon interim order passed by this Court in Writ-A No.16415 of 2021 passed on 14.12.2021 wherein the same Circular dated 20.11.2014 was relied upon to argue that a person can only be transferred from Civil Police to another branch with his consent. Learned Standing Counsel was granted time to file counter affidavit and the writ petition was directed to be listed along with similar matters and till the next date of listing, the effect and operation of the transfer order dated 02.09.2021 was stayed.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner prays that parity may be given to the petitioner also as his transfer order has been challenged by him on the very same ground.
6. This Court has carefully perused the interim order dated 14.12.2021 and is also aware of the Supreme Court observation in Vishnu Traders Vs. State of Haryana (1995) Supp 1 SCC 461, but parity of interim order can be given when a writ petition remained pending of similarly situated petitioners. The interim order cannot be relied upon when this Court decides the matter finally.
7. Learned Standing Counsel has placed before this Court instructions dated 28.06.2022 sent from the Police Headquarters, Gomti Nagar Lko, wherein circular issued on 28.01.2022 has been referred to wherein it has been stated that such personnel who have completed three years in the GRP by 31.12.2022 are liable to be repatriated to the Civil Police. Consequently, vacancies would arise of 63 Sub Inspectors, 20176 Constables in the GRP. They need to be filled up by equal number of Sub Inspectors and Constables from the Civil police. Consequently, nominations have been asked for from various zones with the further expectation that such Civil Police Constables shall be posted at the nearest GRP Thana/ Chowki of their current District. The instructions sent by the DG also referred to the request made by GRP HQrs in this regard on 09.02.2022 for repatriation of personnel who have completed the required period of service/ posting in the GRP and the letter sent by the I.G. Agra Zone dated 10.05.2022 where nomination of all such police personnel who satisfy the requirements as per Cricular issued have been made, the petitioner being one of such persons whose names have been sent by I.G. Agra Zone.
8. The instructions referred to by the DG of Police are in a Circular dated 29.05.2008 by which conditions have been laid down for transfer from Civil Police to GRP. A Sub Inspector/ Head Constable/ Constable to be so transferred should below 50 years of age and that their posting would be done initially for a period of three years and in case no personnel is available to replace them, then a further exension of three years posting may be considered. Initially consent should be sought from those proposed to be posted in GRP, but in case not more than 25% of the vacancies can be filled up on the basis of consent given by the concerned personnel, then the Seniority list/ Merit list shall be examined and those lower down in merit shall be transferred to GRP. Every year the DIG Civil Police shall make such nominations so that no vacancies arise in a particular year which remain unfilled. At least 50% of the personnel should be between 18 to 35 years of age and the rest may be between 35 to 47 years of age. No nomination be made of any personnel who were beyond 47 years as the tenure is of three years and the incumbent is likely to reach 50 years of age before he can be repatriated to the Civil Police. The instructions sent by the HQrs also referred to the judgment rendered by Full Bench of this Court on 07.03.2014 in Special Appeal No.616 of 2011: Om Prakash Singh Vs. State of U.P. and others, wherein this Court has observed that transfers from Civil Police to GRP can be made and that GRP is only one of the branches of police department and there is no prohibition in the Police Regulation for transfers from District Police to GRP.
9. Learned counsel appearing for the State Respondent Sri Ashish Kumar Nagvanshi has pointed out from the annexures to the writ petition, the Circular dated 06.04.2017, which has been relied upon by the petitioner himself, wherein mention has been made of nominations being sent in Form-A and Form-B. Form-A is meant for those who were willing and had given their consent and Form-B related to nominations being made on the basis of merit list prepared in the zone to fill up the remaining vacancies, in case of unavailability of willing personnel.
10. This Court has carefully considered the language of the Circular dated 14.11.2014 and the Circular dated 06.04.2017. Paragraph-2 of the Circular, which has been relied upon by learned counsel for the petitioner states as follows:-
"Atah aap apne zone se icchuk upnirikshak nagrik police/ mukhya arakshi nagrik police/ arakshi nagrik police ke namankan nirdharit praroop me taiyaar kara kar hard copy mai sewa vivran (C D sahit) dinank 20.11.2014 tak uplabdh karane ka kasht karein."
11. It appears that both the Circulars have been issued at different points of time for that particular year only i.e. for nominations of the year 2014 and for nominations of the year 2017 to be made by the Competent Authority in the zone itself.
12. The petitioner's nomination is governed by the Circular dated 09.02.2022, a copy of which has been annexed along with the instructions sent from the Police Headquarters which gives in detail the number of personnel required post wise and Thana wise for GRP Zones/ Commissionerates of both Sub Inspectors, Constables and Head Constables. The usual condition of ineligibility of personnel to be transferred to GRP has been mentioned in the said Circular and that the ACRs of such personnel should be completed in all respects and nothing adverse should be found in their ACRs.
13. This Court finds that the Police Headquarters is careful in not posting the tainted police personnel in the GRP and also not to post such persons who are more than 47 years of age because the duty in GRP Thana requires extremely fit personnel who have to travel in trains most of the time and they have to look after the security of the passengers as well as other goods being transported through Railways.
14. The grounds taken in this petition for challenge to the transfer order have not appealed to this Court. If the interpretation sough to be given by the petitioner to para-2 of the Circular is believed, it would mean that no police personnel can be transferred against his wishes to the G.R.P. It would indeed be detrimental to the administration of a disciplined force. This Court in its Full Bench decision in Om Prakash Singh has examined the Police Regulations and the G.R.P. Manual in entirety and held that G.R.P. is only a branch of the Police force and there can be no restriction on transfer of police officers from one branch to another. The petitioner is directed to join at his transferred place of posting.
15. However, since the petitioner's mother is ill as also his wife who is suffering from paralysis, he may make a representation to the IG, GRP who shall consider documentary evidence filed along with the representation and pass appropriate orders sympathetically within a period of six weeks from the date such representation is received by him.
16. The petition stands disposed of.
Order Date :- 6.7.2022 Rahul