Kerala High Court
Nand Kishore Singh @ Nanda Kishore vs Union Of India
Author: P.V.Asha
Bench: P.V.Asha
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE P.V.ASHA
THURSDAY, THE 30TH DAY OF MARCH 2017/9TH CHAITHRA, 1939
WP(C).No. 9764 of 2017 (U)
---------------------------
PETITIONER(S):
-------------
NAND KISHORE SINGH @ NANDA KISHORE,
AGED 49 YEARS, S/O. CHEEDI LAL,
8-10, CISF COMPLEX,
NTPC, KAYAMKULAM.
BY ADVS.SRI.R.SUNIL KUMAR
SMT.A.SALINI LAL
RESPONDENT(S):
--------------
1. UNION OF INDIA,
REP.BY MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS,
NORTH BLOCK,
CENTRAL SECRETARIAT,
NEW DELHI - 110001,
REP.BY ITS SECRETARY.
2. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL,
CENTRAL INDUSTRIAL SECURITY FORCE
13, CGO COMPLEX,
LODHI ROAD, NEW DELHI - 110003.
3. THE DEPUTY INSPECTOR GENERAL,
CISF (SZ) HEAD QUARTERS,
CHENNAI, PIN -600004.
4. THE UNIT COMMANDER,
CISF UNIT, N.T.P.C.,
KAYAMKULAM - 690502.
BY SRI.N.NAGARESH, ASSISTANT SOLICITOR GENERAL
SRI.JAISHANKAR V.NAIR, CGC
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
30-03-2017, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
EL
WP(C).No. 9764 of 2017 (U)
---------------------------
APPENDIX
PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS
-----------------------
EXHIBIT-P1: COPY OF THE POSTING DETAILS OF THE PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT-P2: COPY OF THE TRANSFER AND POSTING OF PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT-P3: COPY OF THE DISCHARGE CERTIFICATE ISSUED FROM YESODHA
HOSPITAL, HYDREBAD.
EXHIBIT-P4: COPY OF THE LETTER ISSUED FROM V.S.M. HOSPITAL
MAVELIKKARA.
EXHIBIT-P5: COPY OF THE TREATMENT CERTIFICATE OF SREE RAMAKRISHNA
PHARMACY AND HOSPITAL CHINGOLI.
EXHIBIT-P6: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 27/6/16.
EXHIBIT-P7: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 13/10/16.
EXHIBIT-P8: COPY OF THE LIST OF IZT FOR THE YEAR 2017.
EXHIBIT-P9: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION BEFORE THE RESPONDENT DATED
17/1/17.
EXHIBIT-P10: COPY OF THE FORWARDING NOTE.
EXHIBIT-P11: COPY OF THE TRANSFER ORDER.
EXHIBIT-P12: TRUE COPY OF CIRCULAR NO.53/2011
EXHIBIT-P13: COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER IN WP(C):NO.10229/15.
EXHIBIT-P14: COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C):NO.10229/15.
RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS
-----------------------
NIL
TRUE COPY
P.S. TO JUDGE
EL
P.V.ASHA, J.
---------------------------------------------
W.P.(C). No. 9764 of 2017
----------------------------------------------
Dated this the 30th day of March, 2017
JUDGMENT
The petitioner who is a Constable Driver in CISF challenges his transfer ordered as per Ext.P11, on the ground that the same is in violation of Exts.P8 and P12 guidelines. Petitioner belongs to Uttar Pradesh. He joined CISF on 09.11.2000. He worked in various units of CISF in Rajasthan, Nagpur, Goa and Hyderebad, before he was transferred to NTPC, Kayamkulam as per Ext. P1 order on 01.09.2012. According to him, his posting at Kayamkulam was on the basis of his request for a posting in Kerala for the purpose of the treatment of his wife, who has been ailing from Hepatitis B. She has been ailing and undergoing treatment from 2007 onwards in various hospitals. Pointing out that she was having considerable improvement on Ayurvedic treatment being undergone in Kerala, he submitted a representation before the respondents requesting to retain him in NTPC Kayamkulam, for a period of one more year. The impugned order of transfer was issued while the representation Ext.P9 was pending before the respondent. Ext.P11 order was passed directing him to get relieved on 31.03.2015. Petitioner points out that, there is another Constable Driver in NTPC, W.P.(C). No. 9764 of 2017 2 Kayamkulam, who is desirous of transfer to his home town, which is outside the State. The petitioner has also pointed out that, the respondents had allowed him to continue in the NTPC, Kayamkulam on the basis of the judgment Ext.P14 when he was transferred in a similar situation in 2015.
2. The respondents have filed a statement. It is stated that members of the CISF are bound to work any time and any where in the country. However guidelines have been issued in 2011 regarding transfer and postings of CISF personnel. The maximum tenure of an official in home zone and out of home zone are given therein. The petitioner has completed 14 years 5 months and 16 days' service as on 25.04.2015 and hence he is due for his out of Home zone posting. According to the respondents, the maximum tenure of a member of the CISF on out of home zone posting is 9 years. He is therefore due for transfers to home zone. According to them, the retention of the petitioner any more would create administrative problems for deploying others who are due for posting from out of Home Zone. It is also stated that, the petitioner had reported at NTPC, Kayamkulam on 17.09.2012 on regular posting from CISF Unit. According to them, the respondents had already considered his request when he was transferred and posted at Chandigarh in the year 2014. W.P.(C). No. 9764 of 2017 3 Acceding to his request, he was allowed to continue at Kayamkulam. It is further stated that, the petitioner stands posted to Home Zone posting in northern sector as per order dated 23.1.2017 and subsequently posted to 7th Reserve Battalion Jammu & Kashmir. According to the respondents, the request of the petitioner for retention has already been considered and rejected on 20.03.2017. The case of the respondents is that, petitioner has never been in hard areas even though he completed more than 16 years of service. Therefore he was overdue for a posting in a hard area and accordingly by the present order of transfer he has been posted in a hard area.
3. The respondents further state that, the petitioner has not produced sufficient medical records in support of his claim that his wife is suffering from Hepatitis-B and according to them, the petitioner is suppressing the actual facts in order to avoid posting in hard area. It is also stated that there is no vacancy of Driver available in the Unit, since there are only two constable Drivers presently posted to the NTPC Unit. The respondents further submit that, one Sri Babu, who reported in the Unit on 24.05.2014 is posted to Eastern Sector according to non-completion of the mandatory period of 13 years including training period. He has submitted an W.P.(C). No. 9764 of 2017 4 application on 25.01.2017 saying that he is suffering from Blood Cancer and requested to cancel his posting to Home Zone and therefore the said posting was cancelled.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently opposed the contention of the respondents. He also points out that he is yet to receive orders rejecting his representation. According to him, he has produced sufficient records to show that his wife is under treatment for Hepatitis- B.
5. Petitioner is a member of a disciplined force. He is claiming retention on the basis of the guidelines issued in Exts.P8 and P12. According to the respondents, the retention of the petitioner will cause serious administrative difficulties to other personnels who are awaiting posting in accordance with law. Therefore even assuming that petitioner can claim retention on outside home zone posting under the guidelines, this court cannot under Article 226 of the Constitution of India direct the respondents to enforce the guidelines. Petitioner does not have a case that the transfer is ordered in violation of any statutory rules. There is no allegation of malafides also.
In the above circumstances, no relief can be granted to the petitioner. However since the petitioner's wife W.P.(C). No. 9764 of 2017 5 is undergoing treatment in Kerala, the respondent shall see that the quarters alloted to the petitioner is kept available to his family for a period of one year. In case the petitioner requires such accommodation, the petitioner shall submit a representation before the 2nd respondent and the 2nd respondent shall consider the same with all compassion and see that the quarters is made available for her occupation atleast for a period of one year so as to enable her to undergo the treatment.
With the above observations, the writ petition is dismissed.
Sd/-P.V.ASHA, Judge lsn