High Court Kerala High Court

P.M.Manojkumar vs The Additional Digp on 13 September, 2007

Kerala High Court
P.M.Manojkumar vs The Additional Digp on 13 September, 2007
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C) No. 27245 of 2007(R)


1. P.M.MANOJKUMAR,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. THE ADDITIONAL DIGP,
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE DEPUTY INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE

3. INSPECTOR  GENERAL OF POLICE (PERS)

4. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.G.SASIDHARAN CHEMPAZHANTHIYIL

                For Respondent  :SRI.P.PARAMESWARAN NAIR,ASST.SOLICITOR

The Hon'ble MR. Justice V.GIRI

 Dated :13/09/2007

 O R D E R
                             V. GIRI , J
            ==========================
                   W.P.(C) NO. 27245 OF 2007
            ==========================
          Dated this the 11th day of September, 2007.


                           JUDGMENT

The petitioner, who serves as a driver in C.R.P.F is

aggrieved by the fact that he is now required to report at Jammu

& Kashmir, before his representation seeking continued posting

at the Group Centre at Pallipuram, is looked into and appropriate

decision in that regard taken by the Director General, the 4th

respondent.

2. I have heard learned Standing Counsel appearing on

behalf of the respondents as well. Posting of personnel in

Paramilitary Forces is done by the competent authority taking

note of the requirements which fall in different parts of the

country. Even the norms relating to transfer formulated in

respect of civil servants do not confer any right on a Government

servant to resist an order of transfer. The ground for

interference under Article 226, with such orders are extremely

limited. It is more so in the case of members of Paramilitary

W.P.(C) No. 27245/2007 : 2 :

Forces and they will have to abide by the requirements assessed

by the superior officer.

3. In the facts and circumstances of the case, I do not find

any ground to interfere on Ext.P1. Nevertheless the 4th

respondent may take an appropriate decision on Ext.P3 within a

period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this

judgment and if it is found that the petitioner could be

accommodated in the Group Centre, C.R.P.F, Pallippuram, it is

open to the 4th respondent to take appropriate decision in that

regard.

The writ petition is disposed of accordingly.

V. GIRI, JUDGE.

rv

W.P.(C) No. 27245/2007 : 3 :