IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 08TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2019 BEFORE THE HON' BLE MR.JUSTICE R.DEVDAS WRIT PETITION NO.5033 OF 2018 (S-RES) BETWEEN SRI ADIVEPPA GONI S/O SHIVARAI AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, WORKING AS CT/DRIVER, CENTRAL RESERVE POLICE FORCE, GROUP CENTER, YELAHANKA BENGALURU 560064. ... PETITIONER (BY SRI SRINIVASA. K, ADVOCATE) AND 1. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL CENTRAL RESERVE POLICE FORCE C.G.O. COMPLEX, LODHI ROAD, NEW DELHI- 110001 2. THE DEPUTY INSPECTOR OF GENERAL OF POLICE (EST), CENTRAL RESERVE POLICE FORCE, C.G.O. COMPLEX, LODHI ROAD, NEW DELHI -110001 3. THE INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE C. R. P. F., K.K.SECTOR YELAHANKA, BANGALORE 560064 4. DEPUTY INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE C. R. P. F., GC BENGALURU YELAHANKA, BENGALURU 560064 ... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI S.RAJASHEKAR, ADVOCATE FOR R1 TO R4) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE 3RD RESPONDENT TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATION OF THE PETITIONER DATED 15.09.2017 VIDE ANNEXURE-E TO THE WRIT PETITION AND ETC.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER R.DEVDAS J., (ORAL):
Though, this matter is coming up for ‘Hearing on Interlocutory application’, with the consent of the learned counsel on both the sides the matter is heard and disposed of finally.
2. The petitioner is a permanent employee of the respondent CRPF. He was initially appointed as a Constable/Driver with effect from 07.05.2012. The services of the petitioner was confirmed in the year 2013. The petitioner has served in ‘69 Battalion’ in Manipur State and later he was transferred to ‘200 Battalion’ in Delhi. The petitioner was blessed with a son on 19.09.2012. But unfortunately, after 20 months, the child was diagnosed with blood cancer. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that since there is a specialized hospital in Bengaluru for treating cancer i.e., at Kidwai Memorial Hospital, the petitioner sought for transfer to Bengaluru for the treatment of his son. Accordingly, at the request of the petitioner, the 2nd respondent passed an order of transfer dated 28.09.2016 to Group Center, Bengaluru.
3. Learned counsel for the respondent would point out from the order dated 21.10.2016 that the transfer to Group Center, Bengaluru was for a period of one year and it has been stated very clearly that the petitioner shall return his previous unit after completion of one year.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that since the treatment was not completed, he was forced, under the circumstances, to request the respondents to continue him at Bengaluru for another period of two years, so that the treatment could be completed.
5. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that the representation of the petitioner was considered and an order dated 19.12.2017 was passed by the 2nd respondent rejecting the request made by the petitioner. It has been stated in the said order that the services of the petitioner is required at the earlier unit and therefore, the DIGP, Group Center, CRPF, Bengaluru was directed to relieve the petitioner with immediate effect. The said order was communicated to the petitioner by communication dated 27.12.2017. At this juncture, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the said order was not communicated to the petitioner.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner draws the attention of this Court to the Standing Order No.07/2015 with regard to transfer of Non-Gazetted (Executive) Personnel and Technical/Tradesmen) force personnel including mahila personnel. Clause 4 provides for eligibility for transfer. Sub-clause (viii) provides that the normal tenure in filed station is of 04 years and for hard field area/SOZ, Static and peace stations is 03 years.
7. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the Group Center at Bengaluru falls within the definition of ‘peace station’ and therefore even the standing order would provide that the petitioner may be continued for a period of three years. Learned counsel however points out to clause 16, wherein it is provided that the eligibility conditions as laid down may be further relaxed for one year in very deserving cases, by sector IGP, in certain circumstances and one of the circumstance being medical ground of spouse or child suffering from cancer.
8. In the light of the above, this Court is of the opinion that the respondents are required to reconsider the request made by the petitioner. Even otherwise, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner would undertake that he will not ask for transfer or posting to group center or static places in future. The earnest request of the petitioner is that he may be permitted to continue at Bengaluru at least till the end of September, 2019.
9. Therefore, this petition is disposed of with a direction to the petitioner to make one more representation to the respondents and the respondents are directed to consider such an application or request in the light of the observations made above and pass orders within a period of one week from the date of submission of the request by the petitioner. The petitioner is required to make such representation within a period of one week from today. The petition is accordingly disposed of.
10. In view of the disposal of the main matter, I.A.No.1/2018 for vacating stay does not survive for consideration and it is accordingly dismissed.
SD/- JUDGE KLY/