[2023/RJJD/002054]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT

JODHPUR

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 6749/2021

Ganesha Ram S/o Shri Kumbha Ram, Aged About 47 Years,

Resident Of Village Bhari Nagar, Dhanari Kallan, Tehsil Baori

District Jodhpur.

----Petitioner

Versus

1.

State Of Rajasthan, Through Secretary, Department Of

Home, Govt. Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur.

2.

Director General Of Police, Head Quarter, Jaipur.

3.

Addl. Inspector General Of Police, (Vigilance), Rajasthan,

Jaipur.

4.

Inspector General Of Police, Jodhpur Range, Jodhpur.

5.

Commissioner Of Police, Jodhpur.

6.

Dy. Commissioner Of Police, Headquarter, Jodhpur.

7.

The Superintendent Of Police, Rajsamand.

8.

Reserve Inspector, Reserve Police Line, Commissionerate,

Jodhpur.

----Respondents

For Petitioner(s)

:

Mr. S.S. Gour

For Respondent(s)

:

Mr. Anil Kumar Bissa

HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI

Order

24/01/2023

Learned counsel for the parties jointly submit that the

controversy is squarely covered by the order passed by a

coordinate Bench of this Hon’ble Court in Dinesh Kumar Vs. State of

Rajasthan & Ors. (S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.11067/2021) on

10.02.2022, which reads as follows:

“These writ petitions have been filed by the petitioners aggrieved

against the order dated 18.12.2020 (Annex.3), whereby, the Headquarter

of the petitioners during the period of suspension has been changed from

Churu to Sri Ganganagar.

The respondents by order dated 18.12.2020, inter-alia indicating

that as it has come to the notice that in most of the cases, the suspended

[2023/RJJD/002054]

(2 of 4)

[CW-6749/2021]

policemen have their Headquarter in the same Range/Unit, resulting in an

apprehension that they may affect the cases and, therefore, their

Headquarters be changed and consequently, the Headquarter of the

petitioners has been changed.

Learned counsel for the petitioners made submissions that issue

regarding the change of of Headquarter of persons like petitioners, who

are Head Constable stands squarely covered by judgment of this Court in

Subhash Chandra v. State of Rajasthan & Ors.: S.B. Civil Writ Petition

No.10353/2021, decided on 03.09.2021, which order has been upheld by

the Division Bench in State of Rajasthan & Ors. v. Surendra Khokhar: D.B.

Special Appeal Writ No.610/2021, decided on 29.11.2021.

Learned counsel for the respondents attempted to make

submissions that the order in the case of Subhash Chandra (supra), as

upheld by the Division Bench, is contrary to the provisions of the Rule.

However, it was conceded that the seniority of Head Constable is being

maintained at District Level.

A Coordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Subhash Chandra

(supra) came to the following conclusion:-

“(35) As the appointing authority of Constable/Head-

Constable is the Superintendent of Police of the district

concerned, consequent to their transfer under consideration,

the Constables and Head-Constables will be required to

receive instructions/directions from the Superintendent of

Police of the district in which they have been transferred and

as a natural corollary of their transfer, their appointing

authority, so also the disciplinary authority will be changed.

(36) Such action of the respondents cannot be countenanced

as the Appointing Authority and Disciplinary Authority of an

employee cannot be changed without his/her consent.

(37) The transfers made vide order under challenge are, on

the one hand, contrary to the statutory provisions and

judgments of this Court and on the other hand reflective of

non-application of mind.

(38) This Court fails to comprehend that if any disciplinary

action is to be taken against a transferred Constable/Head

Constable, then, who will be the competent authority to

initiate the enquiry? Subhash Chandra (petitioner in S.B. Civil

Writ Petition No.10353/2021), being a Constable (General

Duty), has bee