WP(C) 2713/2000 BEFORE HON’BLE JUSTICE B.K. SHARMA Heard Mr. S.S. Dey along with Mr. D. B. Ahmed, learned counsel for the p etitioner and Mr. N. Bora, learned C.G.S.C. appearing for the respondents. The petitioner claiming to be a Fire Wing personnel in the rank of cons table under the respondents has assailed the legality and validity of the transf er and posting order dated 03.05.2000 (Annexure-9 (a)) so far as the same relate s to him in the category of non opted -From Fire Wing to Security Wing . The petitioner was first appointed as constable way back in 1989. Therea fter he was sent for Fire Wing Training which he successfully completed. The pet itioner has annexed a copy of the certificate dated 09.02.91 certifying his succ essful completion of the Firmen’s Course conducted by CISF at Deoli in Rajasthan . It is the case of the petitioner that after completion of the said course, he has been serving in the Fire Wing. According to the petitioner he had exercised his option for being absorbed in the Fire Wing which was called for in the year 1991. In paragraph-3 of the writ petition, the petitioner has made a statement that option was taken in April, 1991. The incumbents who had exercised their opt ion to be absorbed in the Fire Wing were subsequently absorbed in the Fire Wing, but the petitioner was excluded from such absorption. Situated thus, he made re presentation for redressal of his grievance, but in the meantime by the impugned order dated 03.05.2000 the petitioner was included for transfer and posting in the category of non opted - From Fire Wing to Security Wing . According to the petitioner, the respondents could not have transferred and posted him in the Security Wing categorizing him in the non-opted category . It is the further case of the petitioner that persons junior to him in the Fir e Wing were absorbed in the Fire Wing and have been granted further opportunity to progress in their service career by way of promotion etc. Thus, it is the ca se of the petitioner that not only he has been transferred from the Fire Wing to Security Wing categorizing him as non opted , but at the same time he has also been deprived of his service benefits, which he would have otherwise earned had he been absorbed in the Fire Wing pursuant to the option exercised by him in Ap ril, 1991. The respondents have filed their counter affidavit and have contended t hat there is nothing on record to show that the petitioner in fact, had exercise d his option in time. According to them, had it been the fact that the petitione r had exercised his option, he would have surely produced the documentary proof of the same. In paragraph-9 of the affidavit in opposition, the respondents have stated that the petitioner made an application on 27.01.99 requesting for absor ption in the CISF Fire Wing cadre and the same was forwarded to the Group Comman dant, CISF, Group Headquarter, Guwahati by letter dated 31.01.99. In Annexure-7 to the writ petition which is a letter from the Assistant Commandant, CISF to th e Deputy Commandant, CISF, it has been stated that the corresponding file relati ng to absorption in CISF Fire Wing upto the year 1992 were weeded out by the off ice. Since the files were weeded out, the office was unable to intimate/furnish the information relating to the option exercised by the petitioner. In the year, 1997, the Deputy Commandant, CISF had addressed a letter to the DIG , CISF furnishing the particulars of the fire trained personnel upto the rank o f Inspector. In the particulars the name of the petitioner appeared at serial No . 5 against the column whether he had exercised option in response to Force Hq rs. CISF Circular 25/90 to 31/90 . The remark given was yes . Likewise under th e head Place of posting at the time of exercising option for FIR cadre , the re mark given against the petitioner was CISF Unit, FACT (UDL), Udyagmandal, Keral a . Referring to this document, Mr. Dey, learned counsel for the petitioner subm its that the respondents themselves having admitted that the petitioner had exer cised his option, there is no escape on the part of the respondents to absorb th e petitioner from the due date in reference to his juniors who in the meantime h ave been absorbed in the Fire Wing of the service. Mr. N. Bora, learned C.G.S.C. countering the above argument of Mr. Dey, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the Deputy Commandant could not have furnished information relating to purported option exercised by the petiti oner. He submits that such information was furnished on the basis of the request made by the petitioner. According to him since the records were maintained in t he Headquarter, the Deputy Commandant of the Unit sitting at Nagaon could not ha ve certified that the petitioner in fact, had exercised his option. From the materials on record and in absence of any documentary proof su bmitted by the petitioner, it is difficult for the writ court to arrive at a def inite finding that the petitioner in fact had exercised his option during the re levant period. Mr. Dey, learned counsel for the petitioner has made an alternati ve submission that even now the respondents may consider the case of the petitio ner for his absorption on the basis of his willingness, he has all alone expres sed. He submits that since the petitioner has all along served in the Fire Wing and has undergone requisite training, there can not be any impediment toward abs orption of the petitioner in the Fire Wing of the Service. The question relating to absorption of the petitioner in the Fire Wing c ertainly will have a bearing in the service prospects of the petitioner. But it cannot be lost sight of the fact that the petitioner is in the disciplined force with transfer as one of the service conditions. The impugned order dated 03. 05.2000 was relating to transfer and posting of the incumbents named therein whi ch included the petitioner as well. It is one thing to show that the respondents have acted illegally in not absorbing the petitioner in the Fire Wing of the se rvice, but it is altogether a different thing when it comes to the question of t ransfer of the petitioner and for that matter any Armed Force personnel. By the impugned order while categorizing the petitioner an non-opted - From the Fire Wing the petitioner was transferred to FPP Farraka. However, he is still contin uing at Nagaon Paper Mill in the Morigaon District by virtue of the interim orde r passed on 26.05.2000. By now more than 7 years have passed and the petitioner is still continuing in the same place of posting. In view of the above, I dispose of the writ petition with the following directions: 1) The respondents may carry out an enquiry relating to the claim of the pe titioner that he had exercised his option in due time in accordance with Headqua rter CISF Circular 25/90 to 31/90 from 23.11.90 to 11.07.91. Upon such inquiry if it is found that the petitioner in fact had exercised option, the respondents shall absorb him in the Fire Wing conferring him all benefits including promot ion in accordance with rules at per with his juniors and applying the same yards tick and parameters. 2) Even if it is found that the petitioner had not exercised his option dur ing the relevant period, but having regard to the fact that he has expressed his willingness for being absorbed in the Fire Wing and in fact, he has all along b een serving in the Fire Wing, the respondents may also consider his absorption i n the Fire Wing on that basis. 3) The respondents shall carry out the aforesaid exercise as expeditiously as possible preferably within three months from today. In the meantime for this limited period of three months or till such time an app ropriate order is passed, the petitioner many not be transferred from the Fire Wing. However, it is made clear that it will be open for the respondents to tran sfer him to any Fire Wing of any CISF establishment/unit in the exigencies of s erving or in public interest. Writ petition is disposed of.