R.C. Sharma v. Union of India & Ors.

1. Learned counsel as abQve appears for the respondents on advance copy being served.

2. Relevant record pertaining to petitioner's transfer from Delhi to Chandigarh has been produced.

3. Undisputed facts are that the petitioner, working as an Assistant Sub Inspector (Executive) under CISF, is due to superannuate on 3LL[2].20L[2], meaning thereby, the petitioner is left with 1 year, 4 months and 16 days service.

4. Undisputedly as per transfer policy of CISF, petitioner would be entitled to a last leg posting at a station of his choice, but this would be subject to availability of a post at the city where petitioner exercises the option to serve on last leg basis.

5. Petitioner is a resident of the township of Bulandshahar in the State of Uttar Pradesh, which is about 100 kilometers from '( W.P.(c) No.5710./201L Page | 1- 2011:DHC:18237-DB b Del h i.

6. Vide order dated 26.7.20LI, petitioner has been transferred from Delhi to Chandigarh. Reason for the transfer is that the petitioner was posted for duties at Delhi Metro Rail Corporation offices or stations. lt was noted that there was COmplaints by travelers on the Metro Rail and a policy decision was taken to weed out all clsF personnel from DMRC duties against whom, pertaining to indiscipline, insubordination, misbehavior, intoxication, sexual harassment or acts involving moral turpitude, penalties were levied in the past.

7. This decision was taken in the month of May 2OLL' Working upon said policy decision, it was found that 169 CISF per5onnel attached to the DMRC were required to be removed from duty at'DMRC installations.

8. Petitioner happens to be one such person. His past service record is not good.

9. We do not find any fault in the decision taken by the respondents to depute the best faces of CISF at DMRC, for the reason such force personnel of CISF who are on duty with DMRC have a daily interface with the public and thus, it is expected that the best force personnel, who are citizen friendly are posted at DMRC.

10. BUt, the mass decision taken by the respondents sufters from at least one taint. lt has brushed all CISF personnel with the same colour, ignoring that some of them may be entitled to last leg posting.

11. As noted herein above, petitioner would be entitled to a last leg posting and learned counsel for the petitioner states that being a permanent resident of the township of Bulandshahar, petitioner would like to work at a CISF Unit { ? W.P.(c) No.5710/2011 Page | 2 t preferable at Delhi er such Unit which is within reachable distance of Bulandshahar i.e. the petitioner could reach Bulandshahar either by road or by rail in less than 3 hours time.

12. Accordingly, we dispose of the writ petition suspending petitioner's transfer to Chandigarh by a period of 2 weeks and direct that within 2 weeks the respondents would re-consider petitioner's transfer posting to a place near Bulandshahar. We make it clear that the petitioner need not be deputed at DMRC in the said 2 weeks period. lt would be open to CISF to post the petitioner for duties in Delhi anywhere during aforesaid 2 weeks period.

13. We make it further clear that petitioner's request for last leg tiansfer posting will have to be considered by the respondents with reference to its last leg transfer policy and needless to state that the same would be depending upon availability of a suitable post where petitioner can be deployed at the station of his choice.

14. No costs.

15. Dasti. C.M. Appl. No.11657/2OLI Dismissed as infructuous. -t=.-<:q*d PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J AUGUST I.O, 2011 pkb W.P.(c) No.5710/2011 t t[1] ? GAUR, J