Writ Petition No. 13572 of 2025 · The High Court
Case Details
- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:18763 WP No. 13572 of 2025 HC-KAR IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF JUNE, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO. 13572 OF 2025 (S-TR) …PETITIONER BETWEEN: SRI ANANDAPPA KARADDI S/O SHEKHARAPPA AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS WORKING AS HC/GD F. NO. 055050915 GROUP CENTRE.CRPF YELAHANKA BANGALORE -560 064. (BY SRI. SRINIVASA K., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. UNION OF INDIA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS MHA NORTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI-110 001. 2. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL CRPF , CGO COMPLEX LODHI ROAD, NEW DELHI-110 003. 3. INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE(PERS) CRPF, CGO COMPLEX LODHI ROAD, NEW DELHI-110 003. Digitally signed by HEMALATHA A Location: HIGH COURTOF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:18763 WP No. 13572 of 2025 HC-KAR 4. THE DEPUTY INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE (ESTT), DIRECTORATE OFFICE CRPF, CGO COMPLEX LODHI ROAD, NEW DELHI-110003. 5. THE DEUPTY INSPECTOR OF GENERAL POLICE GROUP CENTRE CRPF YELAHANKA, BANGALORE-560064. …RESPONDENTS
Legal Reasoning
(BY SMT. NAYANA TARA B G., ADVOCATE FOR R1 TO R5 ASG-SERVED) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED TRANSFER ORDER-SCT2025 BEARING NO. 941/2025-PER-DTE-P2DA16-PER-DG-SNTS, DATED:30.01.2025, AND ALSO THE ORDER BEARING NO.03/2025-PER-DTE-P2DA16-PER-DG DTD:31.03.2025 VIDE ANNEXURE-G AND H RESPECTIVELY PASSED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT IN SO FAR AS THE PETITIONER IS CONCERNED AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:18763 WP No. 13572 of 2025 HC-KAR ORAL ORDER 1. In this writ petition, the petitioner has called in question the transfer order dated 30.01.2025 passed by respondent No.4 vide Annexure-G to the writ petition, whereby the petitioner has been transferred from Group Centre-Bengaluru to 041-Battalion, Bhopal. 2. The petitioner herein has been appointed as Constable at respondent No.2, CRPF in the year 2005. He has served in various places namely: (i) 176-BN (G/Noida) for 11 months from 2006 to 2007 (ii) 176-BN in Jammu Kashmir for 3 years 3 months from 2007-2010 (iii) 131-BN in Bihar for 5 years 1 month from 2010 to 2015 (iv) 109-BN in Manipur for 4 years 11 months between 2015 and 2020 (v) 197-BN in Jharkhand for 4 months between 2020 and 2021. Thereafter, on his request, the petitioner was posted to GC-Bangalore from Jharkhand on 03.04.2021. As per the Transfer Policy issued by the CRPF, the tenure of Group ‘B’ and ‘C’ officials is 3 years. Since the petitioner was completing his three years of tenure in - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:18763 WP No. 13572 of 2025 HC-KAR Bangalore in the year 2024, he gave a representation as per Annexure-R1 requesting for extension of time of one more year on the ground that his wife is suffering from infertility from 2016 onwards and undergoing treatment for IVF at Milan Hospital in Bengaluru. Pursuant to his representation, extension of time of one year till 2025 was granted by order dated 30.01.2024. After completion of extension period of one year, the impugned order dated 30.01.2025 at Annexure-G has been passed. Also, the representation of the petitioner at Annexure-E has been rejected by order dated 31.03.2025 at Annexure-H. Being aggrieved by the same, the present petition is filed. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the wife of the petitioner is suffering from infertility from 2016 onwards and undergoing treatment for IVF at Hospital in Bengaluru. For the said treatment, the presence of both the husband and wife is required and hence, the petitioner submitted a representation vide Annexure-E seeking extension of time of one more year - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:18763 WP No. 13572 of 2025 HC-KAR from 2025. Inspite of that, the impugned order dated 30.01.2025 vide Annexure-G has been passed and petitioner has been transferred to 041-BN, Bhopal. He further contended that as per the Transfer Policy, the Board of Officers at Units has power to grant extension of time under special category. But the request of the petitioner for extension of time on medical grounds has been rejected and transfer order has been passed. The said action of the respondent is contrary to the Transfer Policy issued by the respondent produced at Annexure-L. He further contended that in respect of similarly situated persons, the extension of time has been granted on medical records. However, the request of the petitioner for extension of time on medical grounds has been rejected. The same amounts to discrimination. He has produced copy of the judgments of this Court passed in W.P.No.21217/2021 and W.P.No.21024/2021 at Annexures-N and N1 to the writ petition, wherein this Court has directed the authorities to reconsider the case of - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:18763 WP No. 13572 of 2025 HC-KAR the petitioner therein. Hence, he sought for allowing the writ petition 4. Per contra, the learned counsel for respondent Nos.1 to 5 has contended that on request of the petitioner, the petitioner has been transferred from Jharkhand to Bengaluru in the year 2021 on medical grounds. As per the Transfer Policy, the tenure for Group ‘B’ and ‘C’ officials is 3 years. The tenure of 3 years of service of petitioner in Bengaluru is from 2021 to 2024. Before the completion of 3 years of tenure, the petitioner’s request for extension of one more year from 2024 to 2025 has been granted. On completion of the said extension period, the impugned transfer order has been passed. She further contended that since the petitioner’s wife is taking infertility treatment, the representation of the petitioner for extension of time of one year has been granted. Again on the same ground, the petitioner has made one more representation vide Annexure-E without producing any supporting medical documents. She further contended that - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC:18763 WP No. 13572 of 2025 HC-KAR in the representation of the petitioner dated 17.05.2025 at Annexure-R4, it is very clear that the petitioner has accepted the transfer order and he has requested for sanction of 10 days EL to report at 41-BN, Bhopal. Now, the petitioner contends that he requires extension of one more year from 2025 for IVF treatment of his wife. It is contrary to the documents produced by the petitioner. Since the tenure of the petitioner has been completed, the authority has rightly passed the transfer order and his request for extension of time has been rightly rejected. Hence, she sought for dismissal of petition. 5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for respondent Nos.1 to 5. Perused the writ papers. 6. The petitioner has been appointed as Constable at CRPF in the year 2005. He has served in various places outside Karnataka. On the request of the petitioner, he has been posted to GC-Bangalore from Jharkhand in the years 2021 on the ground that his wife is suffering from - 8 - NC: 2025:KHC:18763 WP No. 13572 of 2025 HC-KAR infertility from 2016 onwards and requires to undergo treatment. 7. As per the Transfer Policy issued by respondent, the tenure of ‘B’ and ‘C’ Group Officials is 3 years. Since the petitioner was completing his three years of tenure in Bangalore in the year 2024, he gave a representation as per Annexure-R1 requesting for extension of time of one year on the ground that his wife is suffering from infertility from 2016 onwards and undergoing treatment for IVF at Milan Hospital in Bangalore. His request for extension of time of one year till 2025 was granted. Thereafter, anticipating his transfer order in the year 2025, he has given one more representation as per Annexure-E requesting for extension of one more year from 2025 on the same ground that his wife is taking infertility treatment at Nova Hospital, Bangalore. Except producing medical certificate at Annexure-F, there is no other supporting medical records produced to show that it requires one more year for the treatment. - 9 - NC: 2025:KHC:18763 WP No. 13572 of 2025 HC-KAR 8. The petitioner himself had given representation in the year 2023 seeking one more year extension between 2024 to 2025 on the ground that his wife is taking treatment for infertility. Accordingly, the extension of time was granted for one year from 30.01.2024 to 30.01.2025. After completion of one year extension period, the impugned transfer order has been passed. After the transfer order is passed, the petitioner has given representation dated 17.05.2025 as per Annexure-R4 seeking for sanction of 10 days E/L Enroute to proceed on transfer to 41-BN, Bhopal. Since the petitioner has not produced any medical records to show that his wife requires one more year for treatment, his representation has been rightly rejected by the competent authority vide Annexure-H. The judgments produced by the petitioner are not applicable to the facts of the present case. 9.
Decision
In view of the above, this Court is of the opinion that there is no illegality or infirmity in the impugned transfer - 10 - NC: 2025:KHC:18763 WP No. 13572 of 2025 HC-KAR order dated 30.01.2025 passed by respondent No.4 vide Annexure-G. 10. The writ petition is devoid of merits. Accordingly, it is dismissed. 11. All pending I.As., if any, are disposed of. Sd/- (H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD) JUDGE DM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 24