Disposed

Pratipal Singh v. State of Chhattisgarh and Ors.

Chhattisgarh HC28 Apr 2010WPS/1304/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Pratipal Singh challenged his premature transfer under Section 14 of the Chhattisgarh Police Act, 2007. The High Court directed the DGP to decide the pending appeal within 14 days and stayed the impugned order.

What did the court decide?

The petitioner's pending appeal be considered by the Director General of Police within 14 days; the impugned transfer order dated 7-11-2009 is stayed.

Pratipal Singh Vs State of Chhattisgarh… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Chhattisgarh HC (2010)

¶1

C46?)ab7/

¶2

¶3

BEFORE THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶4

WRIT PETITION (S) No. $3M '

¶5

1201b .

¶6

PETITIONER

¶7

% Pratipal Singh, aged about 47'years, S/o. late Shri Kunwa Singh, Currently ‘at posted Bastar Zone Naxal Operation, Base Camp Lohattar, District— Kanker (C.G.).‘

¶8

VERSUS

¶9

RESPONDENTS / 1.“

¶10

State of Chhattisgarh,

¶11

Through:— the Secretary, Department of Home, Mantralaya, DKS Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.)

¶12

~2.

¶13

Director General of Police, Police Headquarters, Raipur, Chhattisgarh

¶14

/3.

¶15

Chairman, Police Establishment Board, Raipur, Chhattisgarh

¶16

Inspector General o'f Police (Admn.), Police Headquarters, Raipur, ’ Chhattisgarh

¶17

¶18

inspector General of Police (Naxal Operation), Chhattisgarh

¶19

WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226, OF THE

¶20

CONSITUTION OF INDIA

¶21

¶22

PARTICULARS OF THE PETITIONER(S)

¶23

As mentioned in the cause title.

¶24

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH : BILASPUR INO.13O4 WRIT PETITION (S) OF 2010

PETITIONER

Pratipal Singh

Versus

R ESPONDENTS

State of Chhattisgarh & Others (Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India)

¶30

Single Bench : Hon’ble Shri Satish K. Agnihotri, J.

¶31

Present :‘Shri Saurabh Dangi, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri V.V.S.LawyerMurthy,for Murthy,for

¶32

PanelShri V.V.S.LawyerMurthy,for the Dy.State.Adv. General with Shri P.K. Bhduri,

¶33

ORDER gORAL)

¶34

(Passed on this 28'“ day of April, 201 O)

¶35

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶36

Case of the petitioner is that the petitioner was posted as Station House Officer, Police Station, Kharora, District Raipur. Without completion of two years of posting at Police Station, Kharora, by order dated 7-11-2009 (Annexure — P/1) the petitioner was transferred from Raipur to Narayanpur, which is against the provisions prescribed under Section 14 of the Chhattisgarh Police Act, 2007 (for short^“Act, 2007”).

¶37

¶38

Section 14 of the Act, 2007 provides that in case of administrative ' exigency if the same is recorded in writing or on the request of the employee, the bar of two years may be lifted. ln the case on hand, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there is no request on the part cf the petitioner and if, it was a case of administrative exigency there was nothing recorded in Writing stating reasons for transferring the petitioner after taking recourse to sub-section (2) of Section 14 of the Act, 2007. Shri Dangi, further submits that being aggrieved by the impugned transferaworder; the petitioner preferred an appeal under the \ pro’visions of Section 22 of the Act, 2007 to the Ponce \ I;\\Establishment^{Boardon12-11-2009.} \.

¶39

Sub-section (3) of Section 22 of the Act, 2007 prdvides for consideration and disposal of representation within a period of 90 days from the date of order. 90 days have lapsed; the Police Establishment Board has not passed any order. lt appears that the provisions of the Act, 2007 has been violated at two places i.e‘ first/y, while passing the transfer order without assigning the reasons and second/y; by not considering the appeal! representation within 90 days, which is statutory prescribed limit.

¶40

¶41

¶42

At this juncture, Shri Murthy, learned Dy. Adv. General appearing with Shri Bhaduri, learned l5anel Lawyer. submits that the pending appeal/representation of the petitioner, before the Police Establishment Board, the same shall be considered and decided within a period of 14 days. t ln view of foregoing, without examining the merits of the case, the Director General of Police/respondent No.2 is directed to consider and decide the pending appeal/representation of the petitioner within a period of 14 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶43

Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. However, it is made clear that till disposal of the appeal/representation, the impugned. order dated 7-11-2009 (Annexure — P/1), passed in respect of the petitioner,^shall not be given effect to.

¶44

¶45

Ashok

Pratipal Singh v. State of Chhattisgarh and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pratipal Singh v. State of Chhattisgarh and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt. Devyani Bai Vs State of Chhattisgarh and Ors.

Basant Kumar Kanthale and Anr. Vs State of Chhattisgarh and Ors.

M/S Chhabra Bus Service Vs Regional Transport Authority

Mojesh Kumar Nand and Others Vs J.K.Parasar and Others

Kapil Ahuja Vs State Bank of India

Rajkumar Kashyap Vs the State of Chhattisgarh and Ors.