Chetan Sahu v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 733 of 2021 Chetan Sahu S/o Shri Makhan Lal Sahu Aged About 46 Years R/o Shanti Nagar, Behind Doodhnadi Colony, Kanker, Police Station City Kotwali, Tahsil And District Kanker Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary, Department Of Home/police , Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Police Station And Post Rakhi, Atal Nagar, New Raipur , District Raipur Chhattisgarh

2. Chairman Police Establishment Board/ Director General Of Police (DGP) , Police Headquarters (PHQ) , Police Station And Post Rakhi, Atal Nagar , New Raipur , District Raipur Chhattisgarh

3. Members Police Establishment Board , Police Headquarters (PHQ) Police Station And Post Rakhi, Atal Nagar, New Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh

4. Inspector General Of Police (IGP) Office Of Inspector General Of Police , Lalbag, Jagdalpur, District Bastar Chhattisgarh

5. Superintendent Of Police (SP) Office Of Superintendent Of Police , North Bastar, Kanker , District Kanker Chhattisgarh ---- Respondents For Petitioner :

Mr. Abhishek Pandey with Ms. Laxmeen Kashyap, Advocates For State :

Mr. V. R. Tiwari, Addl. AG Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board 03/02/2021 1.

The challenge in the present writ petition is to the order Annexure P-1 dated 05.01.2021 (Annexure P-3) by which the petitioner has

been transferred from Police Station Kanker, to Police Station Siksod.

2.

Challenge is on the ground that petitioner has been subjected to frequent transfer as the petitioner at the present place of posting has only come six months back and in a short span of time he has now again been shifted to another Police Station which is located more than 100 Kms. away. Second ground of challenge is that the wife of the petitioner is also posted in Kanker itself therefore respondent authorities should be as far as possible accommodated him in the nearby place. The third ground of challenge that petitioner has raised is that Government instructions itself during the COVID-19 Pandemic period was that any transfers should be made only in case of serious administrative exigency arises. Moreover, the petitioner himself has been inflicted with Covid-19 virus recently and also he was hospitalized for some time. 3.

Be that as it may, considering the fact that order of transfer has been made by the Superintendent of Police transferring the petitioner from one police station within the District to another police station within the same district, this Court does not find any strong case made out by the petitioner calling for an interference with the order of transfer. However, considering the fact that petitioner has raised certain personal inconveniences on being transferred to new place of posting, the only recourse available to the petitioner would be to move an appropriate representation before respondent no.4 & 5 who in turn shall consider the

representation of the petitioner on its own merits in accordance with the rules, guidelines and policies governing the field. 4.

Respondent Authorities are expected to take a decision on the representation of the petitioner at the earliest preferably within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of representation that petitioner shall make.

5.

With the aforesaid observations, the present writ petition stands disposed of.

Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) Judge Rohit