High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Case Law Search
Gulzar Singh v. State Of U.P. And Others - WRIT - A No. 63064 of 2005  RD-AH 3674 (29 September 2005)
Court No. 53
Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 63064 of 2005
Gulzar Singh Vs. State of U.P. and others
Hon'ble Arun Tandon, J.
Heard Smt. Sadhna Upadhaya, Advocate on behalf of petitioner and learned Standing Counsel on behalf of respondents.
The petitioner, Gulzar Singh, who is employed as Sub-Inspector in U.P. Police Subordinate Services, is aggrieved by an order dated 15th September, 2005 issued by the Deputy Inspector General of Police, Police Head Quarter, Allahabad, whereunder the petitioner has been transferred from Bareilly to Meerut Zone, as also against the consequential order issued by the Senior Superintendent of Police, Bareilly fixing 19th September, 2005, as the date for the petitioner being relived for the said purpose. The aforesaid orders have been challenged basically on the ground that the same are an outcome of an uncalled for political pressure exercised by Sri Ata-Ur-Rehman, sitting M.L.A. belonging to the ruling Samajwadi Party. The petitioner in paragraph-7 of the writ petition has stated as follows:
"That, the defeated candidate Shri Mohd. Azahar was the Samajwadi Party representative/candidate in the said election, and is also the first cousin of the sitting M.L.A. of Mr. Ata-Ur-Rehman (supra). The Muslims voters in Gram Panchayat Baheri were divided in two factions out of which one was supporting Mohd. Azhar and the other faction was against Mohd. Azhar and was in favour of Shinder Singh."
On 24th September, 2005, when the present writ petition was taken up as fresh matter before this Court, the Court insisted upon the learned counsel for the petitioner to disclose the exact relationship of Sri Mohd. Azhar with Sri Ata-Ur-Rehman (sitting M.L.A.) and for the said purpose, on the request of the Learned counsel for the petitioner the matter was adjourned to 26th September, 2005 and thereafter to 29th September, 2005.
On 29th September, 2005 a Supplementary affidavit has been filed on behalf of the petitioner and in paragraph-4 of the said affidavit it has been stated as follows:
"That, in Paragraph No.7 of the writ petition the words "like first cousin" have been misprinted as "the first cousin". The error is a typewriting error and the same is also sought to be corrected, hence a Civil Misc. Correction Application has also been made accompanying this Supplementary affidavit and the same is also liable to be allowed by this Hon'ble Court, so as to secure the ends of justice."
From the aforesaid it is apparently clear that the allegation in the writ petition that Sri Mohd. Azhar was first cousin of Sri Ata-Ur-Rehman (sitting M.L.A.) was factually incorrect.
At this stage of the proceedings, the learned counsel for the petitioner insisted that in view of the academic career of the wards of the petitioner, the impugned order of transfer could not be sustained as the same runs contrary to the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India as well as by this Court in various judgments relied upon by the learned counsel for the petitioner.
I have heard counsel for the parties and have gone through the records of the writ petition.
In the opinion of the Court the first contention raised on behalf of the petitioner to the effect that the impugned order of transfer alleged to be mala fide is not supported by sufficient material evidence, inasmuch as the petitioner, being a Sub-Inspector, would necessarily be required to investigate certain offences, occurrence whereof taken place within his territorial limits. Transfer of a Sub-Inspector would necessarily result in some other Sub-Inspector being deputed for further investigation. The allegation that the accused Mohd. Azhar was first the cousin of sitting M.L.A. has been found to be incorrect. This Court is satisfied that the allegations of mala fide alleged against the M.L.A. are not substantiated by material evidence.
It is needless to point out that the allegations of mala fide are not only to be alleged but should also to be supported by cogent evidence. Reference-1991 Supreme Court 1832, (1992) 1 (Supplement) SCC 222.
So far as the second contention raised on behalf of the petitioner, with regard to the academic career of the wards of the petitioner being jeopardized because of the transfer, is concerned, suffice is to record that such issues require consideration by the authorities themselves at the first instance. Therefore, it would be appropriate that the petitioner may approach the authority concerned by way of representation if he has any grievance with regard to the academic career of his wards being interfered with because of the order of transfer.
This Court has no room to doubt that if the petitioner makes a representation before the authority concerned, the authority shall consider and decide the same, in accordance with law, by means of a reasoned speaking order, at the earliest possible.
The writ petition is accordingly dismissed.
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.