KEDAR NATH SINGH Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner was posted in the Civil Police Force of the Police Department. According to Mr. Yogesh Agrawal the petitioner being a Sub-Inspector of Police has been sought to be transferred from one Branch of the Police Department to another Branch of the Police Department which is contrary to Regulation 525 of the Police Regulations as it requires sanction of the Inspector General of Police on transfer of police personnel from one branch to another branch of the Police Department in the cases of persons other than constables. According to him, in the present case, no such sanction has been given by the Inspector General of Police. The order of transfer was issued by the Deputy Inspector General of Police (Administration). According to him, therefore, the order of transfer is void ob initio.

(2.) Learned standing counsel, on the other hand, relies on the statement made in paragraph 10 of the counter-affidavit that the question of sanction does not arise in the present case in view of the order dated 29th March, 1990 by which the Inspector General of Police had delegated his power of grant of sanction in such cases to the Deputy Inspector General of Police (Administration). According to him, the power of grant of sanction may also be delegated by the Inspector General of Police.

(3.) This argument has been adopted by the learned counsel appearing for the respondent No. 4 who is sought to be impleaded as such. His application for impleadment is also allowed by this order on the ground that he having been transferred to the post held by the petitioner had been released from his original post but by reason of the interim order passed in this case, he is not getting his salary. Therefore, his application is allowed. The office will incorporate the name of respondent No. 4 in the writ petition in course of two weeks. Further Mr. Agrawal contends that he has received instructions to submit that the newly added respondent has already joined somewhere and is not waiting for the post held by the petitioner. Be that as it may, his addition will not affect the petitioner's right in any manner. On the other hand, any order passed in this matter being passed in the present case of the newly added respondent cannot be assailed by any one to the extent that it has affected the right of the third party.