IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 18090 of 2007 Between: K. Venugopalan (Force No. 861520116), S/o K. Karunakaran Nair R/o Group Centre, Ranga Reddy, Hakimpet Post, Secunderabad 500 078. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Government of India repby its Secretary, Ministryof Home Affairs South Block New Delhi 2 the Director General of Police, Central Reserve Police Force, CGO Complex, Lodi Road, New Delhi-110003. 3 the Inspector General (Personal), Central Reserve Police Force, CGO Complex, Lodi Road, New Delhi-110003. 4 The Addl. Dy Inspector General of Police, Group Centre, Ranga Reddy CRPF., Hakimpet post, Secunderabad. .....RESPONDENT(S) Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue a Writ, order or directionmore particularly one in thenatureofwRit ofMandamus declaringthe office order no. T-IZ-26/2007- pers-III(GR-D) Dated 17-4-2007 issued bythe 3rd respondent as arbitrary, discriminatory, malafide andcontrarytothe instructions issued bythe Governmentof India from timeto time and consequently set-a side the second transfer order NO. T.IX-26/2007-Pers-III(Gr.D) dated 17-4-2007 and directthe respondents to reconsider his requestmade vide his representationdated 7-8-2007 and permit the petitioners to continue at the same stationin terms of the instructions dated 7-5-2004 issued bythe 3rd respondent and with all other consequential benefits, monetary andotherwise, and pass such otehr order or orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit andproper inthe circumstancesof the case. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.NARINDER PAL SINGH Counsel for the Respondent No.: MR.A.RAJASHEKAR REDDY (ASST SOLICITOR GEN) The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 18090 of 2007 ORDER: The petitioner is appointed as a Constable in the C.R.P.F. in the year 1986. He was posted at various places and by 2006, he was serving at Group Center (GC), Pallipuram, Kerala State. Vide orders, dated 02.08.2006, he was transferred to GC, Ranga Reddy at Hakimpet. However, he was not relieved by the GC, Pallipuram till 03.04.2007. Thereafter, he joined the GC, Ranga Reddy on 01.05.2007. In the meanwhile, the 3rd respondent issued proceedings, dated 17.04.2007, transferring the petitioner to the GC, at Neemuch, Madhya Pradesh. The petitioner challenges the same. The petitioner contends that hardly within eight months from the date of his transfer from Pallipuram and even before he joined the GC, Ranga Reddy, the impugned order is issued. He submits that he has already served at Neemuch at the initial stage, apart from working at New Delhi, and the transfer, through the impugned order, is not justified. The respondents filed a detailed counter affidavit. It is stated that though the petitioner was transferred in the year 2006 from the GC, Pallipuram to the GC, Ranga Reddy, the relief was delayed. It is also pleaded that the impugned order, dated 17.04.2007, came to be issued during the course of summer chain transfers, with reference to the sectors. According to them, the petitioner completed more than 8 ½ years’ service in southern sector, and thereby, became due for being shifted to another sector. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Standing Counsel for the Central Government. Though the petitioner was transferred to the GC, Ranga Reddy vide orders, dated 02.08.2006, he was not relieved by the GC, Pallipuram till 03.04.2007. Even before he joined the new station, the impugned order, dated 17.04.2007 was issued. The respondents do not appear to have verified the tenures of the officials due for transfer, while issuing the impugned order or the proceedings earlier thereto. In case, the petitioner completed the usual tenure of stay in southern sector, by the time, the order, dated 02.08.2006, came to be issued, he ought to have been shifted out of southern sector. Having transferred the petitioner to another Group Center in the same sector, they have to wait for completion of the normal tenure. Issuance of an order of transfer within a period of eight months would have its own repercussions on the transferred employee. The strange feature of the present case is that a second order of transfer, dated 17.04.2007, came to be issued, even before the petitioner joined the new station indicated in the first order of transfer, dated 02.08.2006. Now that the petitioner has joined the GC, Ranga Reddy, the respondents shall have to wait till the completion of the normal tenure. It is not as if the petitioner is being shifted either on administrative or disciplinary grounds. For the foregoing reasons, the writ petition is allowed and the impugned order, dated 17.04.2007, is set aside, to the extent, it concerns the petitioner. It is, however, left open to the respondents to transfer the petitioner outside the southern sector, after he completes the normal tenure at the present station. There shall be no order as to costs. _________ 17.06.2008 jsu ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1.2CCs to 2.2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{TRT} THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 18090 of 2007 Date: 17.06.2008 JSU