Disposed

The State of Maharashtra through the Secretary and Ors. v. Shri. Nitin Vasant Parale and Ors.

Bombay HC9 Mar 2015WP/10492/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court disposed of a writ petition challenging the transfer of approximately 1000 SRPF head constables to regular police. The court held that since the respondents had already transferred 10% of employees in compliance with rules and vacancy requirements, no further issues needed adjudication.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition was disposed of without dealing with other issues raised by the petitioner.

The State of Maharashtra through the Secretary and… — Service and Employment | Bombay HC (2015)

¶1

wp10492.14.sxw

¶2

1/3

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

WRIT PETITION NO. 10492 OF 2014

¶5

The State of Maharashtra through the Secretary, Home Department, Mantralaya & ors. ... Petitioners V/s. Shri Nitin Vasant Parale & ors. ... Respondents

¶6

Mr. A.A. Kumbhakoni, Sr. Counsel a/w. Mr. Shardul Singh, AGP a/w. Mr. P.G. Sawant for the petitioners.

¶7

Ms. S.P. Manchekar for respondents. Mr. Gunaratan Sadavarte, Intervenor.

¶8

CORAM : NARESH H. PATIL AND A.S. GADKARI, JJ .

¶9

9^th March, 2015.

¶10

P.C.

¶11

The learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that around 1006 Head Constables and other deserving persons/officers were transferred under the orders passed by the Additional Director General of Police, SRPF Mr. Parambeer Singh. These officers would be transferred from SRPF to regular police to the various local police stations in the State of Maharashtra. The Order dated 5^th March, 2015 to that effect is taken on record.

¶12

2/3 wp10492.14.sxw

¶13

Learned Senior Counsel further submits that around 3000 officers

¶14

had applied for getting benefit under the scheme but the department had found 1096 deserving and eligible for transferring them to regular police stations in the State. At present the department has issued transfer orders in case of 1006 officers. In cases of remaining 90, the issue would be looked into. Some of the applicants have given choice of particular district where there is no vacancy. These issues would be looked into by the department at the earliest and such applicants would also be posted accordingly. The learned Senior Counsel submits that this exercise is being done in accordance with the rules and keeping in view the 10% cap of transfer from SRPF to regular police and filling in vacancy of regular police cadre.

¶15

On instructions of learned Counsel Mr. Sadavarte, the Counsel appearing for respondents submits that around 200 other applicants have made representation to the department for considering their request for transferring them from SRPF to regular police cadre. Such other applications/representations would be looked into by the department in accordance with the record maintained.

¶16

3/3 wp10492.14.sxw

¶17

In view of the orders passed by the respondents transferring 10%

¶18

of the employees from SRPF to regular police, there is no need to deal

¶19

with other issues raised by the petitioner.

¶20

The Writ Petition is disposed of.

¶21

(A.S. GADKARI, J.) (NARESH H. PATIL, J.)

¶22

L.S. Panjwani, P.S.

The State of Maharashtra through the Secretary and Ors. v. Shri. Nitin Vasant Parale and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The State of Maharashtra through the Secretary and Ors. v. Shri. Nitin Vasant Parale and Ors.

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

Shri Mahesh S/O. Hambirrao Shinde Vs the State of Maharashtra through Directorate of Economics and Statistics and Ors.

Bhagwan Mahadeo Hirdekar Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Shri Mahesh S/O. Hambirrao Shinde Vs the State of Maharashtra through Directorate of Economics and Statistics and Ors.

Dilip Subhash Patole Vs the Chief Executive Officer, Zilla Parishad, Kolhapur and Ors.

Shri. Balkrishna alias Baba Tukaram Shinde and Ors. Vs State of Maharashtra, through Principal Secretary, Transport Dept and Anr.

Dilip Subhash Patole Vs the Chief Executive Officer, Zilla Parishad, Kolhapur and Ors.