SANJAY KUMAR Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner, a Water Carrier in the respondents Railway Protection Force (RPF) and posted at Delhi since the year 2017, has filed this petition impugning the order dated 11th September, 2020 of his transfer to Srinagar as well as the order dated 18th September, 2020 modifying the earlier order and transferring the petitioner, instead of Srinagar, to Chandigarh. The challenge to the transfer is made on the ground of the same being mala fide.

(2.) It is the case of the petitioner, that (i) while posted at Delhi, the petitioner has been having strained relations with his immediate superior officer, which lead to issuance of charge memo dated 27th November, 2018; (ii) the Inquiry Officer (IO) found the charges to have been proved against the petitioner and the Disciplinary Authority, on 27th June, 2019 imposed penalty of stepping down the pay of the petitioner by three stages in the time scale of pay for a period of one year; (iii) the Departmental Appeal preferred by the petitioner was rejected vide order dated 21st July, 2020; (iv) the petitioner continued to be harassed on the basis of false allegations; (v) one of the complainants whose complaint formed the basis of the charge memo dated 27th November, 2018, gave an affidavit dated 9th March, 2019 stating that his complaint against the petitioner was false and that he was tutored by the immediate superior of the petitioner with whom the petitioner had shared strained relations since beginning; (vi) the petitioner was / is being victimized on account of the personal bias of his immediate superior officer against him; (vii) the petitioner however accepted the penalty without any demur; (viii) however the immediate superior officer of the petitioner was still not satisfied and wanted to punish the petitioner further; (ix) vide order dated 11th September, 2020, the petitioner was transferred to Srinagar; though the order stated that the transfer was on administrative grounds, however perusal of the contents of the subsequent correspondence reflects that the said order was issued to punish the petitioner for the second time for the same wrong, owing to personal bias and vendetta; (x) the petitioner had already served at Srinagar, a hard area, from 2014 to 2017; (xi) vide order dated 14th September, 2020, the petitioner was relieved from Delhi and directed to join at Srinagar; (xii) the petitioner was in the midst of family problems because of his one child being two years old and the other child being just three months old; (xiii) the petitioner approached another senior officer, for cancellation of the transfer order but who told the petitioner that he had to suffer the consequences of his misbehaviour with his colleagues and superior officers; (xiv) the petitioner was compelled to submit a letter dated 14th September, 2020, seeking apology for the misbehaviour which had already culminated in the penalty and making a request for transfer to Ambala in lieu of Kashmir Valley; (xv) the said letter of the petitioner was forwarded by the aforementioned senior officer approached by the petitioner, recommending the change of transfer sought by the petitioner; (xvi) the petitioner thereafter vide order dated 18th September, 2020, was relieved from joining at Srinagar and directed to join at Chandigarh; (xvii) the same immediate superior officer with whom the petitioner had strained relation, was otherwise also repeatedly failing the petitioner in the driving test and not forwarding the appeals against the failure preferred by the petitioner, compelling the petitioner to file W.P.(C) No.12520/2019 in this Court and of which notice was issued on 27th November, 2019 and which is still pending; and, (xviii) the said immediate superior officer with whom the petitioner had strained relation has also humiliated the petitioner and the petitioner was constrained to file a private complaint under Section 200 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C.) against him, of offenses under Sections 326, 341, 506 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 alongwith Section 3 of The Scheduled Castes And The Scheduled Tribes (Prevention Of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and which complaint is also pending consideration.

(3.) The counsel for the petitioner has drawn our attention to Annexure-P5, being the letter dated 14th September, 2020 of the petitioner, apologizing for his earlier misconduct and requesting for transfer to Ambala instead of Kashmir Valley and has contended, that the petitioner was forced to write the same and the very fact that the petitioner apologized therein shows that the transfer was punitive.