Apr - High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

1 All Pankaj Kumar and others V. State of U.P. 449
Bench has upheld the theory of plurality of
constitution of Police Establishment
Boards as it has been observed by the Full
Bench that looking into the vast area of the
State and the total strength of the police
force it is not possible to appoint one
Board and accordingly the State by
notification dated 12.3.2008 in exercise of
its power under Section 2 of the Police
Act,1861 had constituted four different
Boards. Thus, the Full Bench has found the
constitution of different Boards as proper.
The Regional Police Establishment Boards
constituted by the Government Order dated
9.4.2010 are headed by the Inspector
General of Police (Establishment) and
there is no illegality in the constitution of
the said Boards.
9. A Division Bench of this Court in
the case of State of U.P. & others Vs. C.P.
Ravindra Singh and others, 2011 (2) ADJ
177 (DB), while setting aside the judgment
passed by the learned Single Judge has
come to the conclusion that in case the
transfer orders have been passed on the
basis of approval of the Regional Police
Establishment Boards there is no illegality.
The learned Standing Counsel further
submits that the Court while deciding the
Writ Petition No.3838 (S/S) of 2010 by
order dated 28.8.2010 had quashed the
transfer orders dated 29.5.2010 and
28.5.2010 by which the petitioners were
transferred, with liberty to the opposite
parties to pass afresh orders in accordance
with law after approval from the Board.
His contention is that in the present case
the Regional Police Establishment Board
has granted approval which is sufficient as
per the requirement of law and according
to the directions issued by the Apex Court
in the case of Prakash Singh (Supra) and
observations made by the Full Bench in the
case of Prakash Singh (Supra). Mere
observation of the Court in its order dated
28.8.2010 to pass afresh orders after
approval of the Board constituted as per
the notification dated 12.3.2008 does not
mean that only that Board which has been
constituted by notification dated 12.3.2008
was required to grant approval and in case
the approval has been granted by the
Regional Police Establishment Board the
order of transfer is bad.
10. I have considered various
submissions made by the learned counsel
for the parties.
11. So far as the contention of
learned counsel for the petitioners that the
Government Order dated 11.7.1986 stands
superseded after coming into force Rules
2008, is concerned, it is to be noted that the
preamble of Rules 2008 recites that the
said rules have been framed to regulate the
selections, promotions, appointments,
determination of seniority and
confirmation etc. of the Constables and
Head Constables of civil police in the
police force. A reading of these rules
indicates that they do not deal with the
transfer of police personnel. It is also to be
seen that as per Rule 26 of the said Rules
2008, the matters which are not covered
under these rules shall be governed by the
rules, regulations and the orders applicable
generally to Government servants. The
Government Order dated 11.7.1986
specifically deals with the transfer of
police personnel as such suffice is to
mention that the said Government Order
dated 11.7.1986 is duly applicable and
enforceable in the present case.
So far as the contention of learned
counsel for the petitioners that in view of
Rule 26 of Rules 2008 only those