Apr - High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

448 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES [2011
also a part of the public services of the
State, therefore, insofar as the police are
concerned, the Regulation pertaining to
transfer would continue to apply to them.
Therefore, though one of the Boards
constituted is not strictly in terms of the
directions issued by the Supreme Court in
Prakash Singh (Supra), nonetheless
considering the exercise that has to be
done and the provisions for transfer, as
contained in the Police Regulations, there
has been sufficient compliance."
Further contention of learned counsel
for the petitioners is that the constitution of
the Regional Police Establishment Board is
not as per the directions issued by the
Apex Court in the case of Prakash Singh
Vs. Union of India (2006) 8 SCC 1. The
Full Bench in the case of Vinod Kumar
(Supra) has only upheld the validity of
constitution of four Police Establishment
Boards by notification dated 12.3.2008, as
such the impugned order passed on the
basis of approval of the Regional Police
Establishment Board are wrong and not
sustainable in the eyes of law.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioners
also submitted that earlier the transfer
orders of the petitioners dated 29.5.2010
and 28.5.2010 were challenged in the Writ
Petition No. 3838 (S/S) of 2010, which
were quashed by the order dated 28.8.2010
with liberty to the opposite parties to pass
afresh orders in accordance with law after
approval from the Board constituted vide
notification dated 12.3.2008 (wrongly
mentioned as 12.8.2009). His contention is
that when the Court had allowed the
opposite parties to pass afresh orders with
the approval from the Board as per the
notification dated 12.3.2008, then it was
not open for the opposite parties to have
taken approval from the Regional Police
Establishment Board, which has not been
constituted as per the notification dated
12.3.2008 as the Regional Police
Establishment Boards have been
constituted vide notification dated
9.4.2010.
The learned Standing Counsel in
opposition has submitted that the
Government Order dated 11.7.1986,
specifically deals with the transfers of the
Police personnel including the Constables
and Head Constables. It also provides that
no police personnel shall be posted in the
home district or the district adjoining to the
home district. It is also submitted by the
learned Standing Counsel that the
Government Order dated 11.7.1986 is fully
applicable even today after the Rules 2008
have been framed which only regulate the
selection, promotion, training,
appointment, determination of seniority
and confirmation etc. of constables and
Head Constables of civil police in the State
of U.P. police force. The said Rules 2008
do not deal with the transfers of the police
personnel.
7. It is further submitted that Rule 26
of Rules 2008, specifically provides that all
those matters which are not covered under
the rules shall be governed by the rules,
regulations and the Orders applicable
generally to the government servants
meaning thereby that the Government
Order dated 11.7.1986, which deals with
the transfers of the police personnel shall
be applicable even after coming into force
of Rules 2008.
8. The learned Standing Counsel
contends that validity of the constitution of
the Regional Police Establishment Boards
was not before the Full Bench in the case
of Vinod Kumar (Supra), however, the Full