V.Abhilash And ORS v. Union Of India And ORS
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
[ CIRCUIT BENCH AT PORT BLAIR ] *** WP.CT/17/2023 V.Abhilash and others Vs.
The Union of India and others Mr. Gopala Binnu Kumar ... for the petitioners Mr. Tulsi Lall ... for the respondent no.1 Mr. Shatardu Chakraborty Mr. Dibesh Dwivedi ... for the Administration November 16, 2023 [SR] Item No.4 1.
We have heard the learned counsel for the parties. 2.
This writ petition is arising out of an order passed by the learned Central Administrative Tribunal, Kolkata Bench, Calcutta on 20th April, 2023 in connection with an application filed under section 19 of the Administrative Tribunal Act, 1985 seeking, inter alia, an order for recalling and/or setting aside the Order Book No.1255 dated 4th August, 2021 issued by the respondent no.6 by which it decided to implement the transfer policy of IRBn at par with the transfer policy of Andaman and Nicobar Police and all consequent order/orders issued by the respondent no.6 including the Order Book No.1295 dated 9th August, 2021 issued by the respondent no.7 and Order Book No.1302 dated 12th August, 2021 issued by the respondent no. 8 whereby the applicants were transferred and posted at Police station under the respondent no.5.
3.
We have carefully read the order under challenge. It appears that Tribunal was in remiss of the fact that the duties and responsibilities of the IRBn personnel are for the purpose mentioned in the Standard Operating Procedure (SoP) and more fully stated in paragraph 4 of the said procedure, proceeded on the basis that they can be treated as police personnel for the purpose of picketing at the police station and refused to interfere with the transfer orders on the premise that the Administration is the best judge to decide the mode and manner of transfer.
4.
For the purpose of brevity and convenience, clause 4 of the SOP dated 07th August, 2015 is reproduced below:- "4. Duty Charter:- The duty charter of the company stationed at Nicobar District is specified below: a) The IRBn personnel shall only be deployed sectionwise i.e. 01 HC & 08 Constables for performing duties such as striking reserve and patrolling. However, to perform picketing duties IRBn personnel shall be deployed at least in pairs (02 staff) alongwith a staff of executive police of the concerned Police Station. b) The IRBn personnel shall not be deployed individually in any case for any form of duty, unless or until the approval of Commandant, IRBn be obtained by the Company Commander.
c) The IRBn personnel shall only be deployed for Law and Order duties, mobile patrolling & foot patrolling, Securities of VVIP/VIP, vital installation including AntiPoaching operations. d) The IRBn personnel shall not be deployed for beat duties and sentry duties at Police Stations and also they shall not be utilized as security aides or helpers. e) All IRBn personnel shall observe proper chain of command. Inquiries into irregularities or breaches of discipline should be made through them.
f) Any direction of the concerned SDPO/SHO given to Company Commander, Company 2 i/c or Platoon Commander regarding duties not specified in the SOP
shall immediately be conveyed to Commandant, IRBn for approval.
g) The IRBn strength at each location will carry 1/3rd Arms and 2/3rd Anti-riots gears."
5.
We are unable to accept the reasoning of the Tribunal solely on the basis that the Standard Operating Procedure dated 7th August, 2015 laid down the object and purpose for appointment of IRBn personnel in which in paragraph 4 the duty charter has indicated in detail the manner and mode of positing of IRBn personnel who have been recruited for the purposes mentioned in the preamble.
6.
Essentially it is to provide safety and security of the various islands in this Union Territory and also for the purpose of assisting the police for maintaining law and order, mobile patrolling and foot patrolling.
7.
In fact, the affidavit filed on behalf of the respondent nos. 2 to 8 would unerringly show that almost all the transfer orders, the purpose of the transfer has been clearly stated, to illustrate, we may record the transfer order issued on 01.07.2014 which clearly says the purpose of transfer limited for duration of 60 days was to perform the law and order and to ensure that no anti-poaching takes place. Similar orders have been disclosed anterior and posterior to the Standard Operating Procedure which also prescribes the duration of transfer along with the reason for such deployment unlike the present transfer order.
8.
Although we may agree with the submission made by Mr. Shatadru Chakraborty learned counsel appearing on
behalf of the respondent nos.2 to 8 that the IRBn personnel cannot oppose the transfer, we are of the view that such transfer order should specify the purpose for transferring them to a particular location and also the duration of such transfer as absence of any such reason or any of the particulars that are available on record in respect of the earlier transfer orders are likely to create an impression that they would be treated alike with the police and would be made to discharge the duties of the police officers or police personnel posted at different police station in the Union of Territory. 9.
It was on that ground we set aside the order of the Tribunal. It would be open for the respondent no.2 to make deployment of the IRBn personnel by way of transfer commensurate with the Standard Operating Procedure dated 07th August, 2015 indicating the purpose for such transfer with the timeline as were followed earlier.
10.
The writ petition is allowed with the aforesaid observation. The impugned order dated 20th April, 2023 is set aside. Accordingly, the notices under challenge before the Tribunal are also stand set aside.
11.
Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties upon compliance of all requisite formalities.
( Soumen Sen, J. ) ( Siddhartha Roy Chowdhury, J. )