Disposed

Vijay Kumar Enkhiya v. Union of India and Ors.

Rajasthan HC28 Aug 2018CW/8293/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner a Border Security Force constable challenged a transfer order citing cardiac ailments. The court did not interfere with the order but directed the petitioner to pursue a representation before the competent authority for reconsideration on merits.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner allowed to pursue representation before competent authority regarding the transfer order.

Vijay Kumar Enkhiya Vs Union of India and Ors. — Service and Employment | Rajasthan HC (2018)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶2

S.B. Civil Writ No. 8293/2018

¶3

Vijay Kumar Enkhiya S/o Shri Birja Ram, No. 907229458, Constable, 169 Bn, Border Security Force, Sagar Road, Bikaner Raj.

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

Union Of India Through Secretary, Ministry Of Home Affairs North Avenue, New Delhi. 110001

¶7

The Director General, Border Security Force, 10-Go Complex, Lodhi Road, New Delhi.

¶8

The Special Director General, Bsf, Western Command, Industrial Area, Phase- Ii, Near Bdr Air Force, Chandigarh.

¶9

The Inspector General, Border Security Force, Mandore Road, Jodhpur Raj.

¶10

The Dy. Inspector General, Border Security Force, Sagar Road, Bikaner Raj.

¶11

The Commandant, 169 Bn, Border Security Force, Sagar Road, Bikaner Raj.

¶12

----Respondents

¶13

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Vipin Makkad

¶14

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P.K. LOHRA

¶15

Order

¶16

28/08/2018

¶17

By the instant writ petition, petitioner has challenged impugned Movement Order dated 24.05.2017 (Annex.1), whereby he is transferred to 152 Bn BSF on his permanent posting.

¶18

The grievance of the petitioner is that he is unable to carry out the transfer order because of serious cardiac ailments. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that since issuance

¶19

(2 of 2)

¶20

[CW-8293/2018]

¶21

of the order he is on medical leave. It is further submitted by learned counsel that petitioner has submitted a detailed representation before competent authority to consider his request for rescinding the transfer order.

¶22

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, while refraining to make any comment on genuineness of the afflictions of petitioner, in my opinion, it would be appropriate for the petitioner to pursue the representation before competent authority.

¶23

Accordingly, without interfering with the impugned transfer order, the petitioner is allowed to pursue the representation before competent authority and competent authority is expected to examine the grievance of the petitioner objectively for passing appropriate orders in accordance with law.

¶24

The writ petition is disposed of accordingly.

¶25

Bharti/15

Vijay Kumar Enkhiya v. Union of India and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vijay Kumar Enkhiya v. Union of India 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

Krishna Kant Joshi Vs Rsrtc and Anr.

Ratan Singh Kumpawat Vs Pawan Kumar Goyal and Anr.

Narendra Kumar Harsh Vs Manjeet Singh and Ors.

Ganpat Ram Vs the State of Rajasthan

Yashnandini Vyas Vs State of Rajasthan

Surendra Singh @ Lala Vs State