Apr - High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

1 All Pankaj Kumar and others V. State of U.P. 453
and ten years respectively and in a
particular police station not more than
three years and five years respectively. In
the Tarai area (including the Tarai and
Bhabar Estates) the period of stay of subinspectors,
head constables and constables
should not exceed five years."
16. The said regulation only provides
that the transfers which result in officers
being stationed far from their homes
should be avoided as much as possible. It
does not mean that the police
officers/personnel should be posted in their
home districts or the districts adjoining to
the home districts. As per the said
regulation the transfers which result in
officers being stationed far from their
homes should be avoided as much as
possible. It does not even prohibit the
transfer to far off places, as such, the
contention raised in this regard by the
learned counsel for the petitioners has no
force.
17. The petitioners were earlier
transferred by orders dated 29.5.2010 and
28.5.2010 and they had challenged the said
orders by filing Writ Petition No. 3838
(SS) of 2010, mainly on the ground that
the transfer orders have been issued with
the approval of the Regional Police
Establishment Board, which has not been
validly constituted and, therefore the
orders are bad. The writ petition was
allowed and the orders dated 29.5.2010
and 28.5.2010 were quashed with liberty to
the opposite parties to pass fresh orders in
accordance with law after approval from
the Board constituted by notification dated
12.3.2008.
18. Since the Full Bench in the case
of Vinod Kumar(Supra) has upheld the
validity of the constitution of various
Police Establishment Boards by
notification dated 12.3.2008 and relying on
the aforesaid Full Bench decision, a
Division Bench of this Court in the case of
State of U.P. & others Vs. C.P. Ravindra
Singh (Supra) has found that in case the
transfer order has been issued with the
approval of the Regional Police
Establishment Board, it would not render
the transfer order bad, I am of the
considered opinion that in case the transfer
order has been passed with the approval of
the Regional Police Establishment Board,
it would not render the order bad. The
observation of the Court in the order dated
28.8.2010 passed in the Writ Petition No.
3838 (S/S) of 2010 is to be read in the
manner that the approval of the Police
Establishment Board duly constituted was
required. Since the validity of the Regional
Police Establishment Board has been
upheld and the present transfer order has
been issued with the approval of the
Regional Police Establishment Board, the
order impugned can not be said to be bad
in law merely because it was observed by
the Court in its order dated 28.8.2010 that
the approval of the Board constituted by
the notification dated 12.3.2008 was
required.
19. In this view of the matter, I am of
the considered opinion that there is no
illegality or infirmity in the impugned
orders. The petitioners are holding a
transferable post. Transfer is an incident of
service. They are supposed to work
anywhere in the State of U.P. The
petitioners have no right to claim their
posting at a particular place.
20. For the aforesaid reasons the writ
petition being devoid of merit is dismissed.
---------