Full Text
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Date of Decision: 28.01.2025
KARTHIKEYAN K (DC/ELECT) .....Petitioner
Through: Mr.Abhay Kumar Bhargava, Ms.Khushi Roy and
Mr.Satyaarth Sinha, Advs.
Through: Mr.Gagan Kumar, SPC
UOI
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SHALINDER KAUR NAVIN CHAWLA, J. (Oral)
JUDGMENT
1. By the present petition, the petitioner prays for the following relief: “i. Issue a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, thereby calling for records and the Annual Transfer Order 2024 bearing number R/3246 issued by the FHQ BSF NEW DELHI, only to the extent of the petitioner. ii. Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, thereby directing the Respondents i.e. DG BSF to transfer the petitioner to FTR HQ BSF Jammu or any other normal location.”
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was posted at Srinagar (FTR), FTR HQ Kashmir, vide Annual Transfer Order-2021 dated 07.07.2021.
3. He submits that in terms of the Transfer Policy Circular dated 01.12.1999, the tenure of a posting at FTR, Srinagar is three years. He W.P.(C) 1065/2025 submits that the petitioner has completed the said tenure, however, is being again placed at FTR, Srinagar thereby, the respondents breaching their own policy.
4. The learned counsel for the respondents, who appears on advance notice, submits that the petitioner has completed his three years of normal tenure posting at FTR, Srinagar only in July 2024. He submits that the petitioner shall be duly considered for a fresh posting in the next posting round that is regularly taken by the respondents i.e., in the Annual Transfer Order-2025.
5. Taking note of the above submission of the learned counsel for the respondents, we dispose of this petition by directing the respondents to consider the contents of the present petition as a representation of the petitioner while issuing the Annual Transfer Order-2025 or Regular Transfer Orders in accordance with its Policy referred hereinabove for the post of Deputy Commandant (Electrical).
6. We, however, make it clear that we have not expressed any opinion on the merits of the claim of the petitioner and in case the respondents reject the representation of the petitioner, it shall be open to the petitioner to challenge the same in accordance with law.
7. The petition is disposed of.
NAVIN CHAWLA, J SHALINDER KAUR, J JANUARY 28, 2025/sg/IK Click here to check corrigendum, if any