Raj Kumar vs Union of India

Dr. Anshuman, J

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the Union of India.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has filed the present writ petition for the following relief/s :-

"(i) For the issuance of any appropriate writ/commanding the respondents to allow the choice post of transfer in Summer Chain Transfer (SCT) in 2022.

(ii) For the issuance of an appropriate Writ directing the Respondents to consider his 1st Choice i.e. for JK.

(iii) For the issuance of any other appropriate writ to which the petitioner is entitled by this Hon'ble Court."

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a Group 'C' employee of the C.R.P.F., who has filed the present writ petition challenging his transfer from G.C., Muzaffarpur to G.C., Pune on the ground that his hardship score was not taken into consideration at the time of transfer. It is further submitted that the petitioner has a hardship score of 691 and had submitted a representation dated 10.01.2025 (Annexure P-3 to the writ petition), which has been rejected without proper consideration of the hardship policy. It is also submitted that, by way of Interlocutory Application No. 01 of 2026, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 20.02.2026 (Annexure P/4 to the writ petition).

Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that this Court, in CWJC No. 3981 of 2026 (Jagdish Prasad Mishra vs. Union of India & Ors.), had set aside a similar order dated 20.02.2026 and directed the petitioner therein to file a fresh representation before the respondent No. 2, i.e., the D.I.G. (Org), Directorate, C.R.P.F., CGO Complex, Lodhi Road, New Delhi, with a direction to decide the same within 60 days. It is submitted that the present case stands on a similar footing and, therefore, a similar order may be passed.

On the other hand, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Union of India submits that the aforesaid writ petition was decided in absence of a counter affidavit, whereas in the present case, a counter affidavit has already been filed. It is further submitted that the petitioner, being an employee of the C.R.P.F., was transferred from G.C., C.R.P.F., Muzaffarpur (Bihar) to G.C., C.R.P.F., Pune (Maharashtra) vide order dated 07.01.2026, issued by the competent authority at the Directorate level, taking into account administrative requirements, vacancy position, tenure norms, and operational exigencies of the Force.

It is further submitted that the transfer policy has been brought on record, and as per Clause 8(a), a Group 'C' employee is liable to be transferred after completion of three years of tenure. The petitioner has admittedly completed more than three years at Muzaffarpur and, therefore, his transfer has been made in accordance with the policy in the interest of the Force.

In light of the submissions made by the parties, and upon consideration of the materials available on record, particularly the fact that the petitioner has completed more than three years of tenure at Muzaffarpur, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the impugned transfer order.

Accordingly, the present writ petition stands dismissed. Interlocutory Application No. 01 of 2026 also stands dismissed.