Failure to consider statutory guidelines on quarantine constituted a non-application of mind by the respondents in denying the petitioner's request.

1. The petitioner asserts that he was enlisted in the CISF as a Sub Inspector on 10.2.2018, following approximately 20 years of service in the Indian Air Force. Despite his request for a posting in his home zone, the petitioner's application was overlooked, prompting him to tender a resignation. However, he later rescinded his resignation, to which his request was accepted. Pursuant to Ext.P13 order by the Deputy Inspector General / DIG AP - NZ, he was instructed to report to the CISF unit ASG Ranchi by 29.1.2022. On receipt of the said communication, the petitioner, through Ext.P10 letter, indicated that he was under home quarantine due to his parents testing positive for COVID - 19, substantiating this claim with their lab reports. He further emphasized his parents' severe health conditions and expressed his inability to report for duty in Ranchi by the aforementioned date. He requested that he be granted a temporary posting at ASG Cochin so that he can strive to report on 29.1.2022 as ordered. This plea was declined as per Ext.P17. Following this, the petitioner made another appeal, which was subsequently denied by Ext.P18. The petitioner asserts that the orders refusing his request to defer joining at Ranchi are clearly passed due to non - application of mind as the petitioner could not have violated the guidelines issued by the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, Government of India, which mandate a 14 - day home quarantine after exposure to a confirmed case. Given these guidelines and considering the considerable distance of over 2000 km between his residence in Kochi and Ranchi, he asserts that he could not have reported to Ranchi on 29.1.2022. It is in the light of the above assertions that this writ petition is filed, seeking to quash Exts.P17 and P18 and to further direct the 7th respondent to reevaluate the petitioner's request for a transfer to his home zone.

2. The respondents 1 to 7 have submitted a counter affidavit. In response to the claims presented by the petitioner, the respondents contend that the petitioner's application to rescind his resignation was approved, and he was directed to recommence duty on 29.1.2022. Concerning a posting in Kerala - based units, the petitioner was advised that, after resuming his position at ASG Ranchi, he could separately submit a written request for assignments closer to his hometown, which would be evaluated based on the current posting policy. Instead of adhering to these guidelines, the petitioner, on 22.1.2022, submitted another application emphasizing his need to be stationed at ASG Cochin due to the medical treatment requirements of his parents, who had tested positive for COVID - 19. The respondents highlighted that due to the petitioner's non - compliance in rejoining ASG Ranchi, his plea for an extended joining period was denied.

3. An additional statement has been filed. It is stated that there are no records to show that the petitioner had been afflicted with COVID - 19 or that he was symptomatic during the said period. It is stated that the petitioner had not intimated that he was under strict home quarantine nor that he was unable to join duty for the aforesaid reason. It is further stated that as the petitioner had stated in his letter that he is ready to join ASG Cochin or any other nearer units within the stipulated period, his contention that he could not have joined ASG Ranchi as he was in the home quarantine cannot be accepted.

4. I have considered the submissions advanced and have gone through the records which are made available before this Court.

5. I find that Ext.P22 is the guidelines issued by the Government of India, Ministry of Health and Family Welfare on 5.1.2022. In the said guideline, it is clearly mentioned that in so far