IMPORTANT POINT
The administrative prerogative power of transfer and the limited scope of court interference in transfer orders made in public interest and for administrative reasons.

JUDGMENT

1. Heard Mr. M. Devananda, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Kh. Samarjit, learned Additional Solicitor General for the respondents.

2. This writ petition has been filed to quash the transfer and posting order dated 12.7.2002 in respect of the petitioner and to accommodate him in any field Units/Bns based in Manipur under M&N Sector in view of the order dated 21.5.2021 passed by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Thoubal and also to direct the respondents to allow the petitioner to remain in the GC, Imphal in view of Para 4(xvi)(b)(iii) of the Standing Order No.7/2015 and the guidelines of SANTOS for Summer Chain Retention.

3. The case of the petitioner is that he was appointed as Constable/GD in the year 1994 and was posted in 132 Bn from 25.6.1994 to 4.11.1995 located at Dimapur. From there, he was transferred to 78 Bn located at Zubza, Nagaland, where he served from 4.11.1995 to 18.5.1998 and then to other Units of 78 Bn located and Jammu and Kashmir (LOC), Tamil Nadu (LOC), Chatha J&K and again in Zubza and served till 22.11.2014. The petitioner was promoted to the post of HC/GD in the year 2014 and was posted at 231 Bn located at Bhopal where he served from 22.11.2014 and again was posted at Units of 231 Bn located at Chattisgarh and served till 5.1.2019 and from 231 Bn, he was transferred and posted at GC, Imphal. From 5.1.2019 till the issuance of the impugned transfer he is serving at GC, Imphal.

4. Further case of the petitioner is that he was transferred to GC Imphal under the M&N Sector, North East Zone only in the year 2019 and he is yet to complete the Zonal Tenure of 14 years under the NEZ and the Sector Tenure of 10 years under the M&N Sector as prescribed in Paragraph No.4(ix) of the Standing Order No.7/2015. According to the petitioner, he is entitled to be considered for relaxation for one year in view of Paragraph No.4(xvi)(b)(iii) of the Standing Order considering the delicate physical health condition of the petitioner's son and the continuing treatment at RIMS, Imphal on the reference of the Doctors of Composite Hospital, Imphal.

5. According to the petitioner, his case is covered by Paragraph 1(A(d) under the Heading Summer Chain Special of the SANTOS Guidelines and Paragraph B under the Heading Summer Chain Retention (Medical Emergency). On 20.5.2022, the petitioner has submitted a representation to the DIGP, GC, CRPF, Imphal seeking to retain him for one year on compassionate ground. But without considering the same, the respondents had issued the impugned transfer order. Challenging the same, the writ petition has been filed.

6. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the impugned transfer order is contrary to the transfer policy, more particularly, Paragraphs No.4 (ix) and 4(xvi)(b)(iii) of the Standing Order No.07/2015 and also Para No.1(A)(d) of the SANTOS guidelines. The learned counsel further submitted that on 20.5.2022, the petitioner submitted a representation seeking to retain for one year considering the health condition of his son. However, violating the Standing Order and the guidelines in regard to transfer and posting, the petitioner was illegally and arbitrarily transferred to 44 Bn.

7. The learned counsel urged that the petitioner could have been adjusted in any Units/Bns within M&N Sector, as he has not completed his sector tenure of 10 years and the zonal tenure of 14 years.

8. The learned counsel next submitted that he was arrested by the Lilong Police in connection with FIR No.47(05)2021 under Sections 307/447/326/34 IPC and was released on bail vide order dated 21.5.2021 and he is complying with the conditional order imposed on him. If the petitioner is to leave for 44 Bn, it would amount to violating the order dated 21.5.2021 and he shall be inevitably held for jumping bail and criminally held liable. Therefore, the impugned transfer and posting order is liable to be set aside.

9. On the other hand, the learned Additional Solicitor General submitted that