WP(C) 1455/2009 BEFORE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE B.K. SHARMA Heard Mr. M.G. Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Mr. U.K. Nair, learned Standing counsel, NF Railway. The petitioner who had joined RPSF in the year 1999 is aggrieved by Anne xure-I communication dated 29.01.2009 by which it was conveyed that the petiti oner could not have been allowed to appear in the GDCE as the same is not permis sible under the Rules. The petitioner while was serving in the RPSF offered his candidature for the post of Accounts Clerk in the FA & CAO Admn., Maligaon. Necessary NOC was a lso issued. The petitioner came out successfully in the selection conducted for the purpose, but when his turn for undergoing training came, he was not release d from RPSF. Situated thus, he approached this Court by filing the instant writ petition. In terms of interim order dated 06.04.2009, the petitioner not only ha d undergone requisite training, but has joined the Accounts department, NF Railw ay as Accounts Clerk. While the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner having been granted necessary NOC to appear in the GDCE and he having cleared the said examination, the RPSF authority cannot withhold his joining in the Accounts Depa rtment, Mr. Nair, learned Standing counsel, NF Railway submits that it is not p ermissible for a RPSF personnel to appear in the GDCE in other departments other than RPSF. In this connection, he has referred to the letter dated 11.08.2003 ( Annexure-1) given by the Railway Board to the General Manager (P), S C Railway, Secunderabad. By the said letter, it was clarified that the RPF/RPSF working in the railways are not entitled to sit in the GDCE in other department. Thus, it i s the stand of the respondents that the particular NOC was issued in favour of t he petitioner erroneously and/or inadvertently and the same cannot clothe the pe titioner with any kind of right. Learned counsel for the petitioner has questioned the applicability of the Annex ure-1 letter dated 11.08.2003 to the case of the petitioner inasmuch as the said letter is not in the form of any general circular, but was issued to the Genera l Manager (P), SC Railways, Secunderabad. Since the petitioner has been working in the Accounts Department pursuant to the training he has already undertaken, if the respondents want to take any action in the matter towards his redeployment in RPSF, he will have to be given the opp ortunity of being heard. The respondents may also consider as to the feasibility of continuation of the petitioner in the Accounts Department. Considering the matter in its entirety, this writ petition is disposed of granti ng liberty to the respondents to take action, if so advised, consistently with t he observations made above. In the event of any decision to repatriate the petit ioner to RPSF, no action shall be taken without giving an opportunity of being h eard to him. Till a decision is taken in the matter consistently with the observ ations made above and providing adequate opportunity of being heard to the peti tioner, the status quo as regards the service of the petitioner shall be maintai ned. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that some other RPSF p ersonnel who were also issued with NOC like that of the petitioner, have been wo rking in the Accounts Department and in their case no action was taken like that of the petitioner. The respondents may also take note of this aspect of the mat ter.