Punjab-Haryana High Court
Head Constable Roshan Lal No.162/Ggn vs State Of Haryana And Others on 16 August, 2012
Author: Augustine George Masih
Bench: Augustine George Masih
C.W.P.No.18855 of 2011 -1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANAAT
CHANDIGARH
C.W.P.No.18855 of 2011
Date of Decision:- 16.08.2012
Head Constable Roshan Lal No.162/GGN ....Petitioner(s)
vs.
State of Haryana and others ....Respondent(s)
***
CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH
***
Present:- Mr.S.S.Khurana, Advocate,
for the petitioner.
Ms.Shruti Jain, A.A.G, Haryana.
***
AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH, J. (Oral)
Petitioner has approached this Court impugning the order dated 7.7.2009 (Annexure P-11) passed by the Director General of Police, Administration, Haryana-respondent No.2 vide which the petitioner stands transferred from Commissionerate of Gurgaon to his parent range, Hisar.
It is the contention of the counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner joined the 3rd Batallion, Haryana Armed Police, as Constable on 26.11.1998. In the year 2004, petitioner was deputed in State Crime Record Bureau, Madhuban from where he was transferred to District Bhiwani and his lien was also changed to District Bhiwani. He was allotted Constabulary No.1075/BWN there on 12.6.2000. Name of the petitioner was approved for List-B under 55% quota from District Bhiwani C.W.P.No.18855 of 2011 -2- for the year 2003-2004 by the Inspector General of Police, Hisar Range, Hisar vide memo. dated 6.4.2004. Lien of the petitioner was changed from District Bhiwani to District Gurgaon vide order dated 2.8.2004 passed by the Director General of Police, Haryana. He was deputed to undergo the Lower School Course from 15.9.2004 to 15.12.2004.
It is the contention of the counsel for the petitioner that since the lien of the petitioner has been transferred from Bhiwani to Gurgaon prior to his relieving for undergoing the Lower School Course i.e. 15.9.2004, the petitioner for, all intents and purposes, as per the decision of the Director General of Police dated 3.4.2006 (Annexure R-1), his parent cadre would be Gurgaon and not Bhiwani as has been taken to be by the respondents. He, accordingly, contends that the impugned order transferring the petitioner from Commissionerate of Gurgaon to Hisar Range, Hisar is not sustainable and deserves to be quashed.
On the other hand, counsel for the respondents has contended that the decision dated 3.4.2006 (Annexure R-1) of the Director General of Police, Haryana which is based upon the judgment passed by this Court in CWP No.18904 of 2005 Megh Pal and others vs. State of Haryana clearly spells out that a person shall be treated in a particular cadre from where he is deputed for the Lower School Course. Since the name of the petitioner was recommended and he was deputed to the Lower School Course from the quota which was assigned to District Bhiwani, which falls under Hisar Range, the petitioner, for all intents and purposes, would be holding the cadre from District Bhiwani which is under Hisar range. The transfer of the petitioner, thus, vide order dated 7.7.2009 (Annexure P-11) by the Director C.W.P.No.18855 of 2011 -3- General of Police, Haryana is in accordance with law and does not call for any interference by this Court.
I have considered the submissions made by the counsel for the parties and with their assistance have gone through the records of the case.
The relevant portion of the decision as taken by the Director General of Police dated 3.4.2006 reads as follows:-
"In compliance of the above directions of the Hon'ble High Court the matter has been examined and it has been decided that Lower School Course should be taken as criterion to determine the cadre of each of the petitioner. A person should be treated in a particular cadre from where he was deputed for Lower School Course. Whereas the cadre of directly recruited ASIs will be determined to which district/unit he was originally allotted."
A perusal of the above would clearly show that as per the decision the criterion which has been determined for finalizing the cadre of each of the candidates is the place from where a person has been deputed for Lower School Course. When it is so mentioned, it does not state the place of posting but on the place from where the person is deputed and the quota which would fall in the share of that particular district/range. Since the name of the petitioner was approved in List-B under 55% quota from District Bhiwani for the year 2003-2004 by the Inspector General of Police, Hisar range, Hisar vide memo dated 6.4.2004, he would fall under District Bhiwani. The lien of the petitioner during the period of his actual deputing C.W.P.No.18855 of 2011 -4- to undergo the Course and his date of approval in List-B does not change anything so far as the claim of the petitioner is concerned as the benchmark for determining the cadre is the seat against which a person is deputed to undergo the Lower School Course. The seat on which the petitioner has been deputed since belongs to the District Bhiwani which falls in Hisar Range, transfer of the petitioner vide impugned order dated 7.7.2009 passed by the Director General of Haryana, is in accordance with law and does not call for any interference by this Court.
Writ petition, therefore, stands dismissed.
August 16, 2012 ( AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH ) poonam JUDGE