2024:BHC-AS:13478-DB Jvs IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 3717 OF 2024 Dattatraya R. Karale } Age: 57, presently posted as } Special Inspector General of } Police Nashik Range, Dakshata }

Building Nashik 422 001 } Petitioner Versus

1. Shekhar Balasaheb Genbhau }

Age: 59 years, presently } Posted as Special Inspector } General of Police, Motor } Transport, Pune I }

}

2. Union of India }

Through the Secretary, } Ministry of Home Affairs, } Government of India, } North Block, } New Delhi 110001 }

}

3. State of Maharashtra }

Through the Chief Secretary, } Mantralaya, } Mumbai 400 032. }

}

4. The Additional Chief }

Secretary, through Home } Department, Mantralaya, }

Mumbai 400 032. } Respondents Mr. Veerendra Tulzapurkar, Senior Advocate i/by Ms. Divya R. Shetty for the petitioner.

Mr. Ashutosh Kumbhakoni, Senior Advocate i/by Mr. Rahul Walia and Mr.Vishwajeet V.

Mohite for respondent no.1.

Dr. Birendra B. Saraf, Advocate General with Mr. P. P. Kakade, Government Pleader, with Mr. B. V. Samant, Additional Government Pleader, Mr. O. A. Chandurkar, Additional Government Pleader and Mrs. G. R. Raghuwanshi, AGP for respondent nos.3 and 4.

CORAM: DEVENDRA KUMAR UPADHYAYA, CJ. &

ARIF S. DOCTOR, J.

Reserved on : 14^th MARCH 2024 Pronounced on : 20^th MARCH 2024 JUDGEMENT: (Per Chief Justice)

1. Rule.

Rule is made returnable forthwith. Learned counsel for the parties have consented to take up this writ petition for final hearing as the pleadings of the respective parties before the Central Administrative Tribunal, Mumbai Bench, Mumbai (hereafter referred to as “the Tribunal”) are available on record of this writ petition as well.

2. Heard Mr. Tulzapurkar, learned senior counsel representing the petitioner, Dr. Birendra Saraf, learned Advocate General representing the State-respondents and Mr. Kumbhakoni, learned senior counsel representing respondent no. 1 and perused the record available before us on this writ petition.

3. This petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeks to assail the judgment and order dated 4^th March 2024 passed by the Tribunal in Original Application No. 111 of 2024, whereby the order dated 31^st January 2024 transferring the petitioner from Thane to Nashik has been set aside and further, a direction has been issued to post the respondent no. 1 as Special Inspector General of Police, Nashik Range, Nashik.

4. Certain facts, which are necessary for proper adjudication of the controversy involved in this petition, which lie in narrow compass, need to be noticed.

5. By means of an order dated 31^st January 2024, the petitioner was transferred from the post of Joint Commissioner of Police, Thane City to the post of Special Inspector General of Police, Nashik Range, Nashik and so far as respondent no. 1 is concerned, the said order recites that he has been transferred by the said order from the post of Special Inspector General of Police, Nashik Range, Nashik, however, the order of his posting will be issued separately. Thereafter, by means of the order dated 2^nd February 2024, the respondent no. 1, who was awaiting his posting pursuant to the order dated 31^st January 2024, was posted on the post of Special Inspector General of Police, Motor Transport, Pune.

6. The respondent no. 1 challenged the order dated 2^nd February 2024, whereby he was posted at Pune by filing Original Application No. 111 of 2024 and subsequently, by way of amendment, also challenged the transfer order dated 31^st January 2024. The Tribunal, after considering the respective cases put forth by the parties, has allowed the Original Application and quashed the order of transfer of the petitioner, dated 31^st January 2024 and also quashed the said order so far as it related to the respondent no. 1, by means of the impugned judgment and order dated 4^th March 2024, which is under challenge in this petition. By the impugned order, the Tribunal has also directed that the respondent no. 1 be posted as Special In