RAM PHAL Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Civil Writ Petitions 2476, 3739, 5714, 5785 and 6207 of 1995 which were heard together raise identical issues which are being disposed of by this judgment. Since the main arguments have been addressed in Civil Writ Petition 2476 of 1995, the facts are taken from that case.

(2.) Shri Ram Phal Sub Inspector working in the Commando Wing of the Haryana Police at Karnal has challenged his transfer from the Government Railway Police (GRP) to the Commando Wing and also his subsequent reversion to the post of Assistant Sub Inspector on various grounds. He has alleged malafides against Shri V.N. Rai the Deputy Inspector General of Police respondent 4 herein. He joined the GRP as a Constable in November, 1970 and thereafter he was promoted as Head Constable. After confirmation on this promoted post, he was further promoted as Assistant Sub Inspector on August 30, 1986. He passed the Upper School Course in September, 1989 and his name was put on list 'E' for promotion as Sub Inspector. He was promoted on July 15, 1994 as Sub Inspector on temporary and ad hoc basis against an existing vacancy in the GRP and was posted as Station House Officer, GRP, Railway Station, Rewari, It is not in dispute that after about a month or so from the date when the petitioner was promoted, Shri V.N. Rai respondent 4 was posted as Deputy Inspector General, Railways and Operations and he was also given additional charge of the Commando Wing of the Haryana Police. Shri M.S. Ahlawat was then posted as Superintendent of Police, Railways at Ambala and the petitioner was working under him in the Railway Police. It is common ground between the parties that under the orders of the Supreme Court some inquiry was being conducted by the C.B.I. against Shri M.S. Ahlawat. It is alleged by the petitioner that respondent No. 4 called him and asked him to give some material to the C.B.I. against Shri M.S. Ahlawat and make a statement against Shri Ahlawat in that Inquiry otherwise he (petitioner) would face serious consequences. It is further alleged that because of the petitioner's refusing to act on the instructions of Shri V.N. Rai he was transferred from the post of Station House Officer to the Commando Wing as per order dated October 10, 1994 (annexure P-3 with the writ petition). It is also pleaded that the petitioner was again called by respondent 4 at his residence on January 30, 1995 which was a Sunday and was told to make a statement against Shri M.S. Ahlawat to the effect that the latter was accepting illegal gratification from the petitioner when he was posted as Station House Officer, GRP Railway Station, Rewari. The petitioner is again said to have said 'no' to Shri Rai as a consequence of which it is alleged that the petitioner was reverted to the post of Assistant Sub Inspector as per order dated February 10, 1995 (Annexure P-10 with the writ petition) passed by Shri Rai. The petitioner has challenged the order dated October 10, 1994 transferring him from the GRP to the Commando Wing and also the order of his reversion dated February 19, 1995 both of which have admittedly been passed by Shri. V.N. Rai respondent 4.

(3.) In response to the notice issued to the respondents, two written statements have been filed one by Shri Shiv Shakti Rao, IPS, Superintendent of Police, Railways Haryana on behalf of respondents 1 to 3 and 5 and the other has been filed by Shri V.N. Rai on his own behalf. Respondents 1 to 3 and 5 have admitted that the petitioner was transferred by Shri V.N. Rai who was then Deputy Inspector General, Railways and Commando and the orders is sought to be justified as being legal and in public interest. Similarly, the order of reversion is also being justified as according to the respondents, the petitioner us promoted only on temporary and ad hoc basis and since he had no right to hold the post of Sub Inspector, it is claimed that he was validly reverted to his substantive rank of Assistant Sub Inspector. It is pleaded that the order of reversion is an order of reversion simpliciter and that it casts no stigma on the petitioner. As regards the allegations of malafides levelled against Shri V.N. Rai, respondents 1 to 3 and 5 have offered no comments as these are matters which pertain to Shri Rai. In the other written statement Shri Rai has raised some preliminary objections alleging that the petitioner is indulging in mud throwing on him and it is pleaded that the transfer of the petitioner was ordered in public interest and since it is an incidence of service and the petitioner being a member of a disciplined force, he is liable to be transferred and deputed on duty any where in the State. As regards the order of reversion, it is pleaded by Shri Rai that the petitioner was promoted on temporary and ad hoc basis and as such he had no right to the post. It is stated that in a criminal case FIR 285 dated 25.8.1994 registered under Section 15 of N.D.P.S. Act at GRP Railway Station, Rewari in which 2 quintals and 55 kgs. of poppy husk was recovered, the petitioner indulged in corruption and did not arrest the culprits immediately and delayed their arrest by at least 40 days. Shri Rai has also referred to the advice given by the Deputy Inspector General to the petitioner and some others to refrain from corruption. The order of reversion according to respondent 4 is according to law and deserves to be maintained.