Back
2018 Supreme(UK) 40
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
K.M. JOSEPH, SHARAD KUMAR SHARMA, JJ.
State of Uttarakhand and others - Appellants
Versus
Dhyan Singh and others - Respondents
SPECIAL APPEAL NO.978, 981, 983, 985, 987, 988, 991, 998, 999, 996, 994, 1000, 995, 1001 OF 2017
Decided on : 15-03-2018
For the Appellant : Mr. Anil Kumar Bisht, Standing Counsel
For the Respondent:Mr. Vinay Kumar and Mr. Shobhit Saharia, Advocates
The main legal point established in the judgment is the interpretation and application of the U.P. Fundamental Rules, U.P. Police Regulations, and the Uttarakhand Police Act, 2007 in determining the transfer and lien of police personnel.
Headnote:
Lien - Transfer of Police Personnel - U.P. Police Regulations - Summary of Acts and Sections: U.P. Fundamental Rules, U.P. Police Regulations, Uttarakhand Police Act, 2007 - The court discussed the concept of lien as per U.P. Fundamental Rules and Regulation 525 of the U.P. Police Regulations. The judgment highlighted the statutory framework and the impact of the regulations on the transfer of police personnel, emphasizing the need to consider the effect of the Fundamental Rules and Regulation 525 in determining the transfer and lien of the petitioners.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners, police personnel, were transferred from PAC to Bomb Detection and Disposal Squad (BDS) in Uttarakhand. They sought relief from the court, claiming that they should be treated as members of the District Armed Police and that their lien stood snapped from PAC.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the petitioners had vacated their accommodation in PAC, surrendered their kits and badges, and were not considered for promotion in their parent cadre. The court held that the petitioners had become members of District Armed Police and directed the respondents to consider their case as per the relevant orders and regulations.
Issues: The issues involved the transfer of police personnel from PAC to BDS, the determination of lien, and the consideration for promotion in the parent cadre.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was based on the interpretation of the U.P. Fundamental Rules, U.P. Police Regulations, and the Uttarakhand Police Act, 2007, emphasizing the acquisition and transfer of lien as per Regulation 525 of the U.P. Police Regulations.
Final Decision: The court allowed the appeals, set aside the judgment of the Single Judge, and remitted the matter back for reconsideration in light of the statutory rules and the aspects presented by the parties.
K.M. Joseph, J.
These Appeals being connected, we are disposing of the same by a common judgment.
2. We take Special Appeal No. 987 of 2017 as the leading case, which arises from Writ Petition (S/S) No. 132 of 2016. We may notice the case of the petitioners, 14 in number, in brief:
After creation of the State of Uttarakhand in the year 2000 and formation of the Uttarakhand Police Force on 31st December, 2001, the Government issued an order dated 31.12.2001. By the same, Bomb Detection and Disposal Squad and the Dog Squad were established. It is mentioned in the order that three units of Bomb Detection and Disposal Squad are being established in the State and it was to consist of three Sub Inspectors, twenty one Head Constables and three Constables (Drivers). An order was passed on 31.10.2006 by the Director General of Police, whereby Bomb Disposal Squad (hereinafter referred to as BDS) established in the State of Uttarakhand was allocated to District Udham Singh Nagar, District Dehradun and District Haridwar. Pursuant to the same, Annexure-2 order dated 22.11.2006 was passed, by which BDS in different Battalions of PAC were allotted to different Districts (three in number). It is further mentioned in Clause 3 of the order dated 22.11.2006 that the posts allotted to the concerned District will be treated to be the part of the allocated cadre strength of the concerned District. The order further recited that the BDS along with its equipment and employees were to be immediately relieved for the allocated Districts. Another additional BDS for District Haridwar came to be allocated vide Annexure-3 order dated 29.11.2007.
3. There are as of today, seven teams of BDS in the State of Uttarakhand. Petitioners are persons, who have been appointed in PAC. Many of them have been appointed prior to the creation of the State of Uttarakhand; some of them have been appointed after creation of the State of Uttarakhand. Paragraph-9 of the writ petition refers to the dates, on which the petitioners have been transferred to BDS. In the order dated 12.04.2013, it is provided that the tenure of the appointment in BDS will ordinarily be of five years. Annexure-6 is produced to show that on 11th July, 2013, directives were issued by the Police Headquarters laying parameters for promotion of the Constables, Armed Police/PAC to the post of Head Constables, Armed Police/PAC. Queries were raised by the Selection Committee. In reply, the Inspector General informed the Chairman of the Selection Committee that the Head Constables Armed Police/PAC, who are included in the selection of the promotional examination after their promotion, can be posted on the post of Head Constable in BDS (Annexure-7). Next, reference is made to order dated 11.11.2014 issued by the Inspector General of Police. It is said to be issued in reply to the Chairman of the Selection Committee in regard to the query relating to the lien of Constables of PAC posted in other branches of Police. It is, inter alia, stated therein that in the Department, the post of Constable in BDS is not sanctioned; only the posts of Head Constable and Sub Inspector are sanctioned in BDS. It is also mentioned therein that at present in BDS, maximum Constables/Head Constables have come by way of transfer from PAC. It is also mentioned that the Constables appointed in BDS will have their lien in their cadre, i.e. P.A.C./Armed Police, and on promotion, they will again be transferred against the vacancies in BDS.
4. Members of the PAC, who are transferred against the vacancies of the Armed Police vide orders dated 12.11.2008 and 15.10.2008 and who have been transferred to the Armed Police after approval of the Additional Director General of Police, are, therefore, deemed to have been transferred in terms of Paragraph No. 525 of the Police Regulations and their lien stands snapped from the PAC. It is further mentioned that the lien of the employee will be determined as provided in Communication dated 11.11.
