IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE EIGHTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 8614 of 2006 Between: M.Antony S/o.Krishnan presently residing at B-28,, type-2 Special Group Center, Central Reserve Police Force, Chandrayanagutta, Hyderabad ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Inspector of General of Police, (Provisional/Communi cation) office of the Director General Central Reserve, New Delhi 2 The Deputy Inspector General (communication) office of the Director General, Central Reserve Police Force, CGO complex Lodhi road, New Delhi 3 The Commandant, No.2 Signal Battalion Group Center Campus, CRPF, Hyderabad 4 The Commandant, Signal Pln./110 Bn, CRPF, Subhas Nagar, Nizamabad (AP)-503002 5 Estate Officer, GC, CRPF, Hyderabad O/o. the Addl. DIGP, Hyderabad - 5 R5 is impleaded as per court order dt. 13-2-2007 in WPMP 3552 of 2007 .....RESPONDENTS 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 or order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the order of the Inspector General of Police of CRPF in the 1st respondent herein dated 14.3.2006 whereby and where under be rejected my representation for being posted in a place where specialist Medical Facility are available for treatment of my Hepatitis B Positive and it is further consequently prayed that this Hon`ble court may be pleased to set aside the order dated 14.3.2006 directing him to transfer me to any place in India where Medical Facility of my treatment of Hepatitis B positive are available and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.MUNIRAJA IRUGU Counsel for the Respondents: MR.A.RAJASHEKAR REDDY (ASST SOLICITOR GEN) The Court made the following : ORDER: The petitioner is working as Head Constable in the C.R.P.F. In the year 2001, he was transferred to the unit at Hyderabad. By orders, dated 17.08.2005, he was transferred to No.110 Battallion at Nizamabad. The petitioner filed W.P.No.307 of 2006, challenging the order of transfer. The writ petition was dismissed on 06.01.2006, at the stage of admission. He was given time of one week to report to duty at Nizamabad. He filed W.A.No.154 of 2006 challenging the order in the writ petition. The writ appeal was disposed of on 15.02.2006, upholding the order passed in the writ petition. It was left open to the petitioner to make a representation to the respondents for appropriate orders, on his medical grounds. The representation made by the petitioner was rejected by the District Inspector General-second respondent herein, on 14.03.2006. It was pointed out that the medical condition of the petitioner is a symptomatic and he can be transferred to any place. The petitioner filed W.P.No.8246 of 2006 with a prayer to transfer him to Battallion Hyderabad, or the unit at Chennai. However, the writ petition was withdrawn on 24.04.2006. Thereafter, he filed the present writ petition assailing the order, dated 14.03.2006. The petitioner contends that the opinion rendered by various authorities, as regards his medical condition, is not correct and he cannot be compelled to work at Nizamabad. He filed several miscellaneous petitions; one such petition is W.P.M.P.No.10974 of 2006 with a prayer to direct the respondents to allow him to work in any place, where medical facilities to treat Hepatitis-B, are available. Obviously, with a view to accommodate the petitioner, the respondents passed an order, dated 23.02.2007, transferring the petitioner to Chandigarh. Even, this was challenged by filing W.P.M.P.No.7180 of 2007. An order of interim suspension was obtained. Many other W.P.M.Ps. were also filed. The grievance of the petitioner is that though his medical condition is very weak, he was posted at places where adequate facilities did not exist. The respondents filed counter-affidavit stating, inter alia, that for the past more than one decade, the petitioner had become law unto himself and he did not obey any orders of posting. Reference is made to various office orders requiring him to report duty and the disobedience thereof. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the transfer of the petitioner from the unit at Hyderabad is contrary to law and guidelines issued by the C.R.P.F., from time to time. He contends that when admittedly the petitioner is placed in P(3) Category, there was no justification for the respondents in transferring him to places, where facilities do not exist for treatment. Learned Standing Counsel for the respondents submits that the petitioner did not obey any instructions, in the context of transfer, and the relevant units had to suffer a lot, on account of the absence of a trained personnel in the signaling unit. It is stated that the validity of the order of transfer, dated 17.08.2005, has already been up held by this Court in W.P.No.307 of 2006 and in W.A.No.154 of 2006 and this subsequent order of transfer has not been specifically challenged in any proceedings. A glance at the record relating to the transfer of the petitioner from place to place and a perusal of the order, dated 14.03.2006, which is assailed in this writ petition, discloses that the petitioner did not have any regard whatsoever for the orders issued by the authorities, from time to time. On the pretext of undergoing treatment for Hepatitis-B, he disobeyed all possible instructions and remained at a place of his choice, disobeying all the instructions and directions. The disobedience relating to the transfer from Hyderabad to Nizamabad presents a typical example. Through order, dated 17.08.2005, he was transferred to Nizamabad, which is not even a far of place from Hyderabad. W.P.No.307 of 2006, filed against the same, was dismissed, holding that the order does not suffer from any illegality, or infirmity. The order was confirmed in the writ appeal. Except that he reported to duty, he did not continue at Nizamabad. Ever since the order of transfer, he remained at Hyderabad, either by applying for leave, or by obtaining one order or the other. May be vexed with the attitude of the petitioner, and acceding to his own request to post him to a place where there is a facility for treating the Hepatitis-B patients, the respondents transferred him to Chandigarh. Even this did not satisfy the petitioner and he obtained a stay of that order also, without specifically challenging the order of transfer. The amount of inconvenience in the signaling section at the corresponding units as well as the indiscipline that may have been spread on account of the disobedience on the part of the petitioner, is not difficult to imagine. But for the fact that the proceedings are pending in this Court, the petitioner would have been dealt with fairly on disciplinary grounds. Any laxity in dealing with such persons would be at the cost of discipline in the paramilitary forces. The tactics adopted by the petitioner and the manner in which he filed petitions one after the other with the sole object of not working anywhere and remaining in the official quarter at Hyderabad, is almost a pinnacle of indiscipline. The writ petition is dismissed by imposing costs of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees five thousand only) and the respondents shall be entitled to deduct the same in instalments at Rs.1,000/- per month. There shall be no order as to costs. ____________________ L.NARASIMHA REDDY, J. Dated:08.07.2008 GJ