SURESH KUMAR Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners have filed the present writ petition for the quashing of the order of transfer dated 07th November, 2012, whereby the petitioners posted in the Traffic Police Lines at Gautam Budh Nagar have now been transferred to the Armed Police. The ground of challenge raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner is, that the transfer order was not approved by the Police Establishment Board. On this issue, the respondents were directed to file a counter affidavit, and thereafter, the Court directed the learned Standing counsel to produce the record of the Police Establishment Board of the last three months.

(2.) The Court has heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the Chief Standing counsel and has also perused the record that has been produced. From a perusal of the aforesaid record, the Court finds that on 12th July, 2012, the Addl. Director General of Police/ Inspector General of Police, Meerut Zone, Meerut, while referring to the policy of the Traffic Directorate, directed all the Authorities in its zone to place a list of those constables and head constables who had crossed the age of 45 and 50 years respectively, so that a decision could be taken as per the policy to transfer them to the Armed Police. In this regard, reminders dated 30th July, 2012, 14th August, 2012 and 19th September, 2012 was made by the Addl. Director General of Police to the Senior Superintendent of Police and to the Superintendent of Police to send the list as early as possible. Pursuant to the said directions, a list was prepared, which was subsequently approved by a committee in its meeting held on 09th October, 2012. The said recommendation of the Committee was placed before the Police Establishment Board, which list was approved on 07th November, 2012, and thereafter, the impugned transfer order was issued.

(3.) In the light of the aforesaid facts that has been culled out from the record, the learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the impugned order only refers to the order of the Addl. Director General of Police dated 12th July, 2012 and does not refer to the approval, if any, granted by the Police Establishment Board on 07th November, 2012. The Court finds from the impugned order that it does refer to the order of the Addl. Director General of Police dated 12th July, 2012, but then by referring to the said order, it does not mean that there has been no approval of the Police Establishment Board. The impugned order is only a consequential order of transfer issued by the Competent Authority transferring the petitioners from Traffic Police to Armed Police. The Court is satisfied that the transfer of the petitioners was approved by the Police Establishment Board, and consequently, there is no irregularity in the transfer order.