KHUSHALCHANDRA SHANKARLAL THAKKAR Vs. COMMANDANT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal under Section 100 of Code of Civil Procedure is filed by original -plaintiff who had preferred Regular Civil Suit No. 991 of 1987 for declaration and permanent injunction. The case of the plaintiff in his suit was that he was appointed as Rakshak in R.P.F on 1st July 1971 at Bhavnagar. He was then transferred to Rajkot in the year 1974. He was again transferred from Rajkot to Mehsana and from Mehsana to Hapa and from Hapa to Jamnagar where he was there for two years and then was transferred to Kalol in November 1981. In the year 1983 he was again transferred from Kalol to Rajkot and in the year 1984 he was transferred from Rajkot to Hapa. It is further case of the plaintiff that he was transferred to Hapa so as to enable him to follow up the medical check up for his two minor children. It is further averred that the plaintiff was again transferred from Hapa to Mehsana by order dated 29th November 1985 without any cause. He requested Mr. H.G. Meena, Inspector not to release him from Hapa as he wanted to request his Commandant (RPF)Rajkot to cancel his transfer order. It is further averred that on 24th November 1985 Mr. H.G Meena, came to his residence at about 10:00 pm and in his absence he misbehaved with his wife. Therefore, the same matter was reported by him to the police and a complaint was registered against Shri H.G Meena under section 354 and 506(2) of IPC. The matter was still under investigation.

(2.) IT is further case of the plaintiff that by order dated 29th November 1985, the defendant No. 1 -commandant (RPF) dismissed the plaintiff from service under Rule 47(b) of the RPF Rules, 1959 without conducting any inquiry. The plaintiff, therefore filed Regular Civil Suit No. 1482 of 1985 challenging the said order. However, the Court directed the plaintiff, to prefer an appeal to the competent authority and directed the competent authority to consider the case of the plaintiff. The plaintiff therefore, preferred appeal to Senior Commandant (H.Q) Church Gate, Mumbai. The Appellate authority then vide order dated 10th April 1987 set aside the order of dismissal and ordered to post the plaintiff as a Sainik at Ratlam in Ratlam Division and, the period from the date of dismissal on 29th November 1985 was treated as without pay and a penalty of reduction in pay to minimum scale of Constable to Rs 825 -1200(RPF) for a period of four years with cumulative effect was imposed.

(3.) IT is further averred by the plaintiff that the order dated 10th April 1987 by the appellate authority in transferring the plaintiff from Hapa to Ratlam and reducing the pay of the plaintiff to minimum scale of Constable is by way of punishment for which the plaintiff was not issued any separate charge -sheet nor was any inquiry held against the plaintiff and therefore such order of transfer as also the order reducing the pay of the plaintiff to minimum scale was illegal, null and void and against the settled principles of natural justice and such order was not binding to the plaintiff. The plaintiff has thus prayed to declare the order of transfer as also the order of reduction in pay -scale for a period of four years with cumulative effect as illegal, null, void and against the settled principles of law and justice as no inquiry as per Rule 44 of the RPF rules was conducted against the plaintiff.