Gujarat High Court High Court

State vs S on 11 May, 2011

Gujarat High Court
State vs S on 11 May, 2011
Author: V. M. G.B.Shah,&Nbsp;
   Gujarat High Court Case Information System 

  
  
    

 
 
    	      
         
	    
		   Print
				          

  


	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	


 


	 

LPA/805/2011	 4/ 4	ORDER 
 
 

	

 

IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
 

 


 

LETTERS
PATENT APPEAL No. 805 of 2011
 

With


 

CIVIL
APPLICATION No.5634 of 2011
 

In


 

SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 10856 of 2010
 

======================================
 

STATE
OF GUJARAT & 1 - Appellants
 

Versus
 

S
K VALA POLICE INSPECTOR & 1 - Respondents
 

====================================== 
Appearance
: 
MS MONALI
BHATT, AGP
for Appellants. 
None for
Respondents. 
======================================


 
	  
	 
	  
		 
			 

CORAM
			: 
			
		
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MR.JUSTICE V. M. SAHAI
		
	
	 
		 
			 

 

			
		
		 
			 

and
		
	
	 
		 
			 

 

			
		
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MR.JUSTICE G.B.SHAH
		
	

 

 
 


 

Date
: 11/05/2011 
COMMON ORAL ORDER

(Per
: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V. M. SAHAI)

RULE.

ORDER
IN CA No.5634 of 2011

We
have heard Ms. Monali Bhatt, learned Assistant Government Pleader
for the appellant.

Learned
Assistant Government Pleader has urged that the respondent was
transferred from Surat to Ahmedabad city by transfer order dated
07.09.2010. The respondent challenged the transfer order by filing
writ petition being Special Civil Application No.10856 of 2010. The
learned Single Judge by order dated 08.09.2010 issued notice and
stayed the transferred order by granting interim relief in terms of
paragraph 10 (C) (i) and (ii). The appellants have filed their
affidavit-in-reply. Paragraphs 7 & 8 of the affidavit-in-reply
filed by the appellants before the learned Single Judge is extracted
below :-

“7. I
state that petitioner was transferred to Ahmedabad City in public
interest as the petitioner has failed to take appropriate steps to
stop activity relating to prohibition and theft of chemical which may
result into hooch tragedy.

8. I
state that in the jurisdiction of the petitioner’s police station,
namely, Kamrej Police Station, raid was carried out on 20.04.2010 and
28.08.2010 by Vigilance Squad whereby liquor worth Rs.1,51,020 was
found and in the raid dated 28.08.2010, 1,14,420 liters of chemical
worth Rs.40,04,700/- was recovered and over all value of the muddamal
was found to the approximately Rs.65,32,100/-. It is clear that
within a short span of four month, when the petitioner was Police
Inspector of Kamrej Police Station. State Vigilance Squad carried
out two successful raids confiscating large amount of muddamal. This
shows that the petitioner was not performing his duties properly and
anti-social activities were going on unabatedly in his jurisdiction
during his tenure. The encouragement provided by the petitioner to
the criminals also cannot be ruled out. Therefore, taking into
consideration the above mentioned facts, the order of transfer was
passed and, therefore, I deny that transfer order was passed for the
political reasons and in defiance of the Government Circular or
Resolution. Raids were carried out by vigilance squad which shows
petitioner fails to perform his duty with due diligence and there was
negligence on part of the petitioner. A copy of the relevant
materials of the raid is annexed hereto and marked as Annexure R II
to this reply. ”

From
the aforesaid, it is clear that the petitioner was transferred to
avoid hooch tragedy as raid was carried out by the Officers of State
Vigilance Squad and huge quantity of liquor was found in the area of
which the respondent was Police Inspector at Kamrej Police Station.
The learned Single Judge by order dated 14.10.2010 issued rule and
extended the interim relief on the ground that the children of the
respondent are studying and they should be permitted to complete
their studies in the current academic year of 2010 – 2011.

It
is well settled by the Apex Court that transfer is incident of
service and it is the discretion of the State Government to transfer
its employees from one place to the other in the interest of better
administration as well as in public interest. The transfer order
could not be interfered unless there were allegations of malafides
which were prima facie established before the learned Single
Judge. In this view of the matter, the appellants are entitled for
interim order.

Rule,
returnable on 14.07.2011.

Until
further orders of this Court, the effect and operation of the orders
dated 08.09.2010 and 14.10.2010 passed by the learned Single Judge
in Special Civil Application No.10856 of 2010 shall remain stayed.

Sd/-

[V. M. SAHAI, J.]

Sd/-

[G. B. SHAH, J.]

Savariya

   

Top