The High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No.5127 of 2024 Pawan Kumar Patra …. Mr. S.K. Singh, Advocate Petitioner -versus- Union of India and others …. Opposite Parties Mr. P.K. Parhi, D.S.G.I. along with Mr. B.K. Padhi, C.G.C. JUSTICE A.K. MOHAPATRA CORAM: Order No.
Decision
ORDER 11.03.2024 01. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual/Physical Mode). 2. On the prayer of the learned counsel for the Petitioner, he is permitted to add DIG (Estt.), DTE, CRPF, Office of the Director General, Block No.1, CGO Complex, Lodhi Road, New Delhi as Opposite Party No.5 to the writ petition. 3. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner as well as learned Deputy Solicitor General of India along with learned Central Government Counsel appearing for the Union of India-Opposite Parties. Perused the writ petition as well as the documents annexed thereto. 4. The Petitioner has been filed the present writ application with the following prayer: “It is therefore humbly prayed that, this // 2 // Hon’ble Court may be graciously be pleased to issue a Rule Nisi calling upon the opposite parties to show cause as to why the order of transfer under Annexure-3 and rejection order under Annexure-5 should not be quashed and further why the petitioner should not be allowed to continue At GC., C.R.P.F., Bhubaneswar, and if the opposite parties fails to show cause or show insufficient cause, the rule may be made absolute by quashing Annexure-3 and 5. Any may be pleased to pass any other appropriate order/orders as deemed fit just and proper for the interest of justice.” 5. Learned counsel for the Petitioner, at the outset, submitted that the Petitioner, who is suffering from schizophrenia has been classified as S2(P) category employee of the Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF). He further contended that earlier the Petitioner had approached this Court challenging his transfer by filing a writ petition bearing W.P.(C) No.6067 of 2023. This Court vide order dated 06.03.2023 disposed of the said writ petition by granting liberty to file a fresh representation before the competent authority in CRPF ventilating his grievance within a period of two weeks along with supporting documents and in such eventuality, the competent authority was directed to consider and dispose of the same within a period of six weeks from the date of filing of such representation. Further, it was directed that any decision taken by the authority shall be communicated to the Petitioner within a period of ten days. Learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner further contended that pursuant to order dated 06.03.2023, the order of transfer of // 3 // Petitioner was not given effect to and the Petitioner was granted extension of one year at his present place of posting. He further contended that this year also the Opposite Parties asked the Petitioner to undergo a review medical examination. Pursuant to such medical examination, a detailed report has been submitted by the competent medical officer under Annexure-2 to the writ petition. On perusal of the detailed medical check-up report, it appears that the Petitioner’s classification continued in S2(P) category. Further, it has been advised to continue the Petitioner in the same category and the restriction in duty as advised by the psychiatric shall continue. 6. With regard to S2(P) category of the employees, learned counsel for the Petitioner referred to the Standing Order No.4/2008 dated 15th December, 2008 under Annexure-6 to the writ petition issued by the Director General, CRPF, New Delhi. He further referred to Clause-22.1 of the Standing Order No.4/2008 wherein the classification has been given in a tabular form. So far as the S-2 Category is concerned, there is a provision for employment limitation in the schedule which provides that the person who has been classified as S-2 is fit for all duties anywhere except, at high altitude, solitary locations and operational duties during IS duty and hostilities and not fit for independent Command and duty with live fire-arms. 7. Referring to the aforesaid conditions in the Standing Order No.4 of 2008 under Annexure-6 to the writ petition, learned counsel for the Petitioner submitted that recently the Petitioner has been transferred to 183 Bn. located at Pulwama in the State // 4 // of Jammu and Kashmir vide order dated 22.01.2024 under Annexure-3 to the writ petition. In such view of the matter, learned counsel for the Petitioner submitted that such transfer order under Annexure-3 is contrary to the Standing Order No.4 of 2008 as well as the medical advice contained in the medical report under Annexure-2 to the writ petition. 8. Learned Central Government Counsel appearing for the Union of India-Opposite Parties, on the other hand, submitted that earlier the Petitioner also approached this Court and pursuant to the order dated 06.03.2023, the Petitioner’s stay at his present place of posting was extended considering his medical ground. So far this year is concerned, learned Central Government Counsel submitted that the case of the Petitioner was considered by the competent authority and after such consideration, the prayer of the Petitioner has been rejected vide order dated 24.02.2024 under Annexure-5 to the writ petition. In such view of the matter, learned Central Government Counsel submitted that the Opposite Parties have not committed any illegality in rejecting the representation of the Petitioner. He further contended that transfer being an incidence of service, the Petitioner cannot have a cause with regard to the posting. Further, the Opposite Parties-employer is to decide as to where the Petitioner is to be posted keeping in view the larger interests of the force. In such view of the matter, learned Central Government Counsel submitted that the writ petition is devoid of merit and, accordingly, the same should be dismissed. 9. Having heard the learned counsels appearing for the // 5 // respective parties and on a careful analysis of the submissions made by the learned counsels and on a careful examination of the background facts as well as the materials on record, this Court observes that after recent medical examination of the Petitioner by the competent medial authority, the Petitioner has been classified under S-2(P) category. Therefore, they are bound by their own Standing Order No.4 of 2008 under Annexure-6 to the writ petition. 10. In such view of the matter, this Court is of the considered view that the case of the Petitioner has not been considered in its proper perspective by rejecting the representation of the Petitioner vide order dated 24.02.2024 under Annexure-5 to the writ petition. Accordingly, this Court deems it proper to dispose of the writ petition at the stage of admission by setting aside the rejection order dated 24.02.2024 under Annexure-5 to the writ petition with a further direction to the Opposite Party No.5 to consider the case of the Petitioner afresh in terms of the analysis made hereinabove and strictly in terms of the Standing Order No.4 of 2008 under Annexure-6 to the writ petition. It is further directed that the representation of the Petitioner shall be disposed of by passing a speaking and reasoned order within a period of four weeks from the date of communication of a copy of this order. The Petitioner is directed to approach the Opposite Party No.5 within two weeks from today along with a copy of this order. Any final decision taken be communicated to the Petitioner within two weeks from the date of taking such decision. Further, it is directed that till a decision is taken on the // 6 // representation of the Petitioner, the order of transfer dated 22.01.2024 under Annexure-3 to the writ petition , so far it relates to the present Petitioner, shall not be given effect to. 11. With the aforesaid observation and direction, the writ petition is disposed of. ( A.K. Mohapatra ) Judge Debasis Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: DEBASIS AECH Reason: Authentication Location: OHC, CUTTACK. Date: 12-Mar-2024 19:42:31