IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.5630 of 2008 SATENDRA KUMAR SINGH Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- Advocate for the Petitioner:- Mr. Ajay Kumar Ambastha Advocate for the State :- Mr. Ahsanuddin Amanullah (S.C.– 17) 4. 24.06.2008 The petitioner challenges annexure “7” which is order dated 09- 03-2008 of the Superintendent of Police, Rail, Katihar whereby the petitioner who is working as Sub-Inspector of Police under Katihar Rail Police has been ordered to be relieved w.e.f. 01.03.2008 for the purpose of joining at Muzaffarpur District Rail Police in compliance to the previous transfer order no. 85/06, memo no. 952/D dated 07.03.2006 of the Deputy Inspector General of Police, Rail, Bihar (annexure-1). The main contention of the petitioner is that the petitioner has been asked to give charge and go to Muzaffarpur on transfer under mala fide motives. Referring to Section 10(2) of the Bihar Police Manual, 2007, it is also submitted that under this provision, an Officer-In-Charge of a Police Station will have a minimum period of two years of posting and that he can be transferred before that period on administrative or other ground as mentioned in the Section. Learned counsel for the petitioner says that as the petitioner has not completed two years at Katihar Railway Police as Officer, he cannot be transferred to other place from Katihar. So far the challenge of annexure 7 is concerned, learned standing counsel replies that it is merely an order to relieve the petitioner in compliance of annexure 1 which is the original transfer order passed on - 2 - 17.09.2006 which was never challenged by the petitioner. Learned counsel has read annexure 1 which mentions that the petitioner has himself filed a petition that he was being tortured by the concerned Rail Superintendent of Police, Katihar and he had prayed for his transfer from Katihar and on his petition, the transfer order was passed transferring him from Katihar to Muzaffarpur. It is submitted that the transfer order was passed on representation of the petitioner himself on 17.09.2006 but despite transfer, the petitioner still remained on post at Katihar and he did not give charge and that at much later stage, the petitioner did not give charge, the impugned annexure 7 was passed directing the concerned authorities to relieve him at a much later stage w.e.f. 01.03.2008. So far the question of Provisions under Section 10(2) of the Bihar Police Act 2007 is concerned, the learned counsel for the respondent submits that it relates to the Police Station under civil jurisdiction under Superintendent of Police in the sense that Superintendent of Police has to transfer the Officer-In-Charge of Police Station under him from time to time and in that context, the transferred time schedule is required to be maintained. So far the petitioner’s case is concerned, it is pointed out that the transfer of the petitioner is not of that nature and he has been transferred from Katihar District Rail Police to Muzaffarpur District Rail Police i.e. from one district to another. So far as the period of posting is concerned, it is further pointed out that the petitioner was already working under Katihar District Police before 17.09.2006 when he was ordered to be transferred vide annexure – 1 and in such view of the matter, the period of two years - 3 - has also been availed by the petitioner. So far the ground of mala fide as taken by the petitioner, no specific instance is pointed out. Considering the above, I find no merit in this application. Accordingly, it is dismissed. Kundan (C.M. Prasad, J.)