Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Prakash vs The State Of Rajasthan ... on 24 January, 2025
[2025:RJ-JD:4906]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1518/2025
Girraj Gurjar S/o Balu Lal, Aged About 35 Years, R/o Bagheri
Kalan, Dist. Alwar, Raj. Post Of Constable Belt No. 202.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. The State Of Rajasthan, Administrative Secretary,
Through Chief Department Of Affairs, Government Of
Rajasthan, Jaipur.
2. The Director General Of Police (Headquarter), Jaipur.
3. The Inspector General Of Police, Udaipur Range, Udaipur.
4. The Superntendent Of Police, Chittorgarh.
----Respondents
Connected with
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1521/2025
Chandar Sain Jayani S/o Nathu Ram, Aged About 32 Years, R/o
Ward No. 6, 2 Js N Dhani, 1 Knn, Phephana, Dist.
Hanumangarh, Raj. Post Of Constable Belt No. 583.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. The State Of Rajasthan, Administrative Secretary,
Through Chief Department Of Affairs, Government Of
Rajasthan, Jaipur.
2. The Director General Of Police (Headquarter), Jaipur.
3. The Inspector General Of Police, Udaipur Range,
Udaipur.
4. The Superntendent Of Police, Chittorgarh.
----Respondents
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1546/2025
Prakash S/o Urja Ram, Aged About 34 Years, R/o Iyasani, Dist.
Nagaur, Raj. Post Of Constable Belt No. 185.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. The State Of Rajasthan, Administrative Secretary,
Through Chief Department Of Affairs, Government Of
Rajasthan, Jaipur.
2. The Director General Of Police (Headquarter), Jaipur.
3. The Inspector General Of Police, Udaipur Range, Udaipur.
4. The Superintendent Of Police, Chittorgarh.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Tanwar Singh Rathore
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Sandeep Soni for
Mr. B.L. Bhati, AAG
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN MONGA
(Downloaded on 28/01/2025 at 10:43:06 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:4906] (2 of 4) [CW-1518/2025]
Order (Oral)
24/01/2025
1. Vide this common order, the aforesaid bunch is being disposed of together as not only the facts involved are similar, but even the issue therein is akin.
2. Illustratively, for the sake of brevity, recitals are being taken from S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1518/2025. Petitioner, serving as a constable in Rajasthan Police, is before this Court assailing an order dated 15.01.2025 (Annex.-2), which he has been transferred from Chittorgarh to Banswara.
2. Briefly speaking, relevant facts as pleaded in the petition are as follows:-
2.1 The petitioner was appointed at the post of Constable (GD) 27.05.2013. Subsequently, vide an order dated 15.01.2025, he has been transferred from Chittorgarh to Banswara i.e. from one District to another.
2.2 The seniority on the post of Constable is maintained on district level basis as per Rule 26 of the Rajasthan Police Subordinate Rules, 1989 and if the petitioner is transferred out of district, it will adversely affect his seniority. Furthermore, the controversy in the instant case has already been put to rest by a Coordinate Bench judgment of this Court in Subhash Chandra vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. Being aggrieved by the impugned transfer order dated 15.01.2025, petitioner has preferred the instant writ petition.
3. In the aforesaid backdrop, I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the case file. (Downloaded on 28/01/2025 at 10:43:06 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:4906] (3 of 4) [CW-1518/2025]
4. First and foremost, reference may be had to judgment rendered by a Coordinate Bench of this Court in Subhash Chandra Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.: S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.10353/2021. Relevant of which, is reproduced hereinbelow:-
"(33) This Court has consistently held that inter-district transfers of Constables and Head-Constables and inter-range transfers of ASI's are contrary to Rule 26 of the Rules of 1989. It will not be out of place to reproduce adjudication made by this Court in the case of Smt. Premlata (supra), which reads thus:-
"A perusal of the said Rules shows that the persons mentioned in column 5 of Sections I, II and IV of the Schedule-I holding substantive rank shall be eligible in the case of Constables on District/Unit, Battalion basis, which means that the concerned Constable shall be promoted as and when his/her turn comes in the district to which he/she has been transferred.
Mr. Jai Singh, Dy. Superintendent of Police, Traffic, Bikaner is present in the Court and confirms the said fact. Thus, this Court fails to understand as to how the petitioner does not stand to suffer, in case she is transferred from Bikaner to Jhunjhunu because, even though, the seniority is maintained from the date of the appointment, she will be promoted only in case the person senior to her in Jhunjhunu has been promoted though his initial appointment is after the date of the initial appointment of the present petitioner. Thus, the transfer order which places the petitioner in disadvantage vis-a- vis for the purpose of promotion cannot be sustained."
(34) Coordinate Benches of this Court have followed the aforesaid view in the cases of Yadram (supra) and Harendra(supra). (35) As the appointing authority of Constable/Head-Constable is the Superintendent of Police of the district concerned, consequent to their transfer under consideration, the Constables and Head- Constables will be required to receive instructions/directions from the Superintendent of Police of the district in which they have been transferred and as a natural corollary of their transfer, their appointing authority, so also the disciplinary authority will be changed.
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (38) This Court fails to comprehend that if any disciplinary action is to be taken against a transferred Constable/Head-Constable, then, who will be the competent authority to initiate the enquiry? Subhash Chandra (petitioner in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.10353/2021), being a Constable (General Duty), has been transferred from Jaisalmer to G.R.P., Ajmer; his disciplinary authority prior to the impugned transfer was Superintendent of Police, Jaisalmer. May be, as per the (Downloaded on 28/01/2025 at 10:43:06 PM) [2025:RJ-JD:4906] (4 of 4) [CW-1518/2025] stand of the respondents, his seniority will remain as per his seniority in Jaisalmer, but what would happen if the persons junior to him posted in Jaisalmer are promoted, whereas no promotional avenues are available in G.R.P., Ajmer. Will he still be given promotion? (39) That apart, if due to any delinquency, a disciplinary action is proposed to be taken against the said Constable (Subhash Chandra), whether the Superintendent of Police, Jaisalmer will be the competent authority to initiate the disciplinary proceedings or the Superintendent of Police at Ajmer?
(40) There are many more related or ancillary questions attached with such transfer, such as; at which place the service record of the transferred employees will be kept, who will deal with leave applications etc. of the transferred Constable/Head-Constables and A.S.Is? The Rules of 1989 are silent in this regard. The hiatus, if any, cannot be filled by the administrative orders."
5. I am in respectful agreement with the above views expressed by the learned Single Judge. In the case in hand, not only there is a blatant violation of Rule 26 of the Rajasthan Police Subordinate Service Rules, 1989, but even otherwise, the judgment (which has attained finality) rendered in Subhash Chandra (supra) is directly applicable herein.
6. In light thereof, I see no reason why the benefit of the same be not accorded to the petitioners.
7. In the premise, the instant writ petitions are allowed. The impugned transfer orders dated 15.01.2025 (Annex.-2) changing the District of the petitioners is therefore set aside, being not sustainable in law.
8. However, respondents are at liberty to pass fresh orders in compliance with applicable Rules within the same District where the petitioners / constables are currently serving.
9. Pending application, if any, stands disposed of.
(ARUN MONGA),J 62, 64, 80-DhananjayS/Rmathur-
Whether fit for reporting: Yes / No
(Downloaded on 28/01/2025 at 10:43:06 PM)
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)