Disposed

Hans Raj Adiwasi Pno. 960650749 and 26 Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home U.P. Lko. and 5 Others

Allahabad HC23 Jun 2023/4699/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This is a writ petition challenging a transfer and relieving order against PCS (PAC) constables. The High Court did not quash the orders but directed the authorities to consider the petitioners' grievances within one week.

What did the court decide?

Directing the authority to entertain and decide the petitioners' representation on their grievances within one week.

Hans Raj Adiwasi Pno. 960650749 and 26 Others Vs… — Service and Employment | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC-LKO:41631

¶2

Court No. - 3

¶3

Case :- WRIT - A No. - 4699 of 2023

¶4

Petitioner :- Hans Raj Adiwasi Pno. 960650749 And 26 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Of Home U.P. Lko. And 5 Others

¶5

Counsel for Petitioner :- Rakesh Kumar Verma,Mukesh Yadav,Om Prakash Misra

¶6

Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶7

Hon'ble Mohd. Azhar Husain Idrisi,J.

¶8

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and Ms. Deepshikha, learned Chief Standing Counsel assisted by Sri Rajbaksh Singh, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State-respondents.

¶9

The present petition has been filed by the petitioners with the following prayer:-

¶10

"(i). Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari thereby quashing the impugned transfer order dated 13.06.2023 passed by opposite party no.2 so far as it relates to petitioners only whose names are mentioned at serial nos. 492, 246, 256, 100, 232, 235, 508, 487, 122, 517, 512, 237, 488, 513, 616, 498, 98, 516, 230, 491, 493, 87, 229, 486, 83, 244 & 411.

¶11

(ii) . Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari thereby quashing the impugned relieving order dated 17.06.2023 passed by opposite party no.4 so far as it relates to and is against the present petitioners.

¶12

(iii). Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding the opposite parties to allow the petitioner to discharge his duties at District Lucknow."

¶13

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners were selected on the post of Constable in Provincial Arms Constabulary (PAC) and were given posting in different battalions. Later on, in due course of time they were promoted on the post of Head Constable in different Battalions and since then, the petitioner have been discharging their duties to the utmost satisfaction of the superior officers and work and

¶14

conduct of the petitioners has always been found satisfactory. Now the petitioners after being promoted on the post of Head Constable have been transferred to District Muradabad and District Bareli.

¶15

The impugned order of transfer dated 13.06.2023 passed by the opposite party no.2 has been challenged by the petitioners so far as it relates to them whereby they have been transferred from 35th Battalion PAC, Mahanagar Lucknow to 8th Battalion PAC, Bareli, 9th Battalion PAC, Muradabad, 23rd Battalion PAC, Muradabad & 24th Battalion PAC, Muradabad on the premise that they have completed 15 years of service as Head Constable in one Battalion of PAC though they have not completed 15 years in one Battalion. It is contended by the petitioners that impugned transfer is against the provisions of sub-para 2 of para 3 of the Government Order dated 07.06.2023 regarding annual transfer policy of the year 2023-24 whereby maximum 10% of the total cadre of employees shall be transferred and excess of the aforesaid 10% of the total working employees (20%) of the transfer out of total working employees shall remain after taking approval of the concerned Minister. It has also been urged that the petitioners are low paid employees and the said transfer would adversely affect them. Further some of the petitioners are at the verge of retirement.

¶16

Learned Chief Standing Counsel has placed a circular dated 16.06.2023 before this Court issued by the Additional Director General of Police, P.A.C., U.P. address to all the Commandants, P.A.C. Battalion, U.P. The contents of the said letter is quoted below:-

"ससेववा मम,

समस्त ससेनवानवायक

पपीएसपी ववाहहिनपी,

उ्ቈर ्ቚदसेश।

1.ककपयवा इस ममुख्यवालय कसे समससंख्यक आदसेश हदनवासंक 13.06.2023 कवा ससंदरर ्ቇहिण करनसे कवा क्ቖ करम जजिसकसे दवारवा एक ववाहहिनपी हिसेतमु हनरवा र रत कवायरकवाल पपूणर करनसे ववालसे ममुख्य आरहቌኌयोሱ कवा स्थवानवान्तरण पपीएसपी ककी एक ववाहहिनपी ससे दपूसरपी ववाहहिनपी मम हकयवा गयवा हिहै।

¶22

उलसेखनपीय हिहै हक एक ववाहहिनपी हिसेतमु हनरवा र रत कवायरकवाल 15 वरर पपूणर करनसे

¶23

ववालसे समस्त ममुख्य आरहቌኌयोሱ मम ससे हदनवासंक 30.04.2025 तक ससेववाहनवक्ቈ हिहोनसे ववालसे, बहैण्ड, कमवाण्डोሱ दल, बवाढ़ रवाहित दल मम कवाय र त यपू०पपी० 112 मम सम्ब्ቍतवा पर कवाय र त, बपी०डपी०डपी०एस०/श्ववान दल, समुरቌኌवा ममुख्यवालय मम कवाय र त एवसं गसंरपीर बपीमवारपी ससे ्ቇजसत ममुख्य आरहቌኌयोሱ कहो छहोड़कर शसेर ममुख्य आरहቌኌयोሱ कवा स्थवानवान्तरण उ्ሹ आदसेश दवारवा हकयवा जिवा चमुकवा हिहै।

¶24

अततः उपरहो्ሹ शसेणपी कसे अन्तगरत आनसे ववालसे ममुख्य आरहቌኌयोሱ कहो छहोड़कर यहद हनरवा र रत कवायरकवाल 15 वरर पपूणर करनसे ववालसे हकसपी ममुख्य आरቌኌपी कवा स्थवानवान्तरण आपककी ववाहहिनपी ससे न हिहआ हिहो , तहो उसकवा हववरण तत्कवाल इस ममुख्यवालय कहो उपलब्र करवानसे कवा क्ቖ करम। सवाथ हिपी इस आशय कवा्ቚ मवाण-प्ቔ रपी उपलब्र करवायवा जिवायसे हक हनरवा र रत कवायरकवाल पपूणर करनसे ववालसे उ्ሹ शसेणपी कहो छहोड़कर अन्य कहोई ममुख्य आरቌኌपी ववाहहिनपी मम स्थवानवान्तरण हिसेतमु शसेर नहिीሻ हिहै।

¶25

(डवा० कसे०एस० ्ቚतवाप कमुमवार) अपर पमुजलस महिवाहनदसेशक, पपीएसपी उ्ቈर ्ቚदसेश।"

¶26

Learned Chief Standing Counsel further submits that in the light of the aforesaid letter dated 16.06.2023 issued by the P.A.C. Directorate, the authorities are in the process of considering the grievance of the petitioner. The petitioners are posted in 35 Battalion P.A.C., Mahanagar Lucknow from last 15 years and they have been relieved from Lucknow.

¶27

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that ends of justice would meet if liberty is given to the petitioners to prefer representation before the competent authority for redressal of their grievances. He further prays that a direction may also be issued to the authority concerned to consider and decide the same within the time specified by this Court.

¶28

Learned Chief Standing Counsel submits that she has no objection to the aforesaid prayer made by the learned counsel for the petitioner.

¶29

In view of the above, this petition is finally disposed of with the following direction:-

¶30

Petitioners are directed to make representations detailing their grievances within a week from today before respondent no.3 and if such representations are moved by the petitioners in the light of new transfer policy dated 15.06.2022 issued by

¶31

State Government and aforesaid Circular dated 16.06.2023 issued by the Additional Director General of Police, P.A.C., U.P., from the date of this order, the respondent no. 3 shall decide the said representations of the petitioners within one week from the date of submission of representations.

¶32

The present writ petition is finally disposed of in aforesaid terms.

¶33

Order Date :- 23.6.2023 S. Shivhare

¶34

Digitally signed by :- SHASHANK SHIVHARE High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Hans Raj Adiwasi Pno. 960650749 and 26 Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home U.P. Lko. and 5 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hans Raj Adiwasi Pno. 960650749 and 26 Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home U.P. Lko. and 5 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shesh Pal Singh @ Shiv Pal Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue, Lucknow and Others

Ravindra Ram (Pno 880500616) Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko. and 4 Others

890650095 Umesh Chandra Pandey Vs State of U.P. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and 4 Others

Himanshu Yadav Vs University of Lucknow Thru. Registrar Distt. Lucknow and Another

Balram @ Balram Shakyawar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue Distt. Lko. and 3 Others

Dipak Kumar Thru. Its Brother in Law Sri Virendra Kumar Gautam Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Deptt. Lucknow and 5 Others