Special Appeal No. 616 of 2011. Case: Om Prakash Singh Vs State of U.P. High Court of Allahabad (India)

Case NumberSpecial Appeal No. 616 of 2011
CounselFor Appellant: A. P. Singh, Adv. and For Respondents: Ms. Sangeeta Chandra, Addl. C.S.C.
JudgesDr. D. Y. Chandrachud, C.J. and Uma Nath Singh , J. and Dr. D. K. Arora , J.
IssuePolice Act (5 of 1861) - Section 2; U.P. Police Regulations - Regulation 525
CitationAIR 2014 All 99
Judgement DateMarch 07, 2014
CourtHigh Court of Allahabad (India)

Judgment:

Dr. D. Y. Chandrachud, C. J.

1. On 2 September, 2011, a Division Bench of this Court has referred two questions of law for consideration of the Full Bench:

(1) Whether a police constable working in the civil police who has rendered service for more than ten years cannot be transferred to another branch in view of the provisions of Regulation 525 of the Uttar Pradesh Police Regulations in view of the decision of the Supreme Court in Jasveer Singh v. State of U.P. and Ors. (2008) 1 UPLBEC 657.

(2) Whether the Government railway police and civil police constitute one cadre or different service cadres.

2. The controversy before the Court revolves around the provisions of Regulation 525 of the Uttar Pradesh Police Regulations. Regulation 525 provides as follows:

"525. Constable of less than two years' service may be transferred by the Superintendent of Police from the armed to the civil police or vice versa. Foot police constables may be transferred to the mounted police at their own request. Any civil police constable of more than two and less than ten years' service may be transferred to the armed police and vice versa by the Superintendent for a period not exceeding six months in any one year. All armed police constables of over two years' service and civil police constables of over two and under ten years' service may be transferred to the other branch of the force for any period with the permission of the Deputy Inspector-General.

In all other cases the transfer of Police Officers from one branch of the force to another or from the police service of other provinces to the Uttar Pradesh Police requires the sanction of the Inspector-General.

3. In order to facilitate an analysis of Regulation 525, it would, at the outset, be appropriate to breakdown several parts of the Regulation into separate sentences. We now proceed to do so:

(i) A constable of less than two years' service may be transferred by the Superintendent of Police from the armed police to the civil police or from the civil police to the armed police;

(ii) Foot police constables may be transferred to the mounted police at their own request;

(iii) A civil police constable with more than two years' service but less than ten years' service may be transferred to the armed police and vice versa by the Superintendent of Police for a period not exceeding six months in one year;

(iv) Armed police constables with over two years' service may be transferred to the other branch of the force with the permission of the Deputy Inspector General;

(v) Civil police constables of over two years' service and under 10 years' service may be transferred to the other branch of the force with the permission of the Deputy Inspector General; and

(vi) In all other cases transfers of police officers from one branch of the force to another or from the police service of other provinces to the Uttar Pradesh Police requires the sanction of the Inspector General.

4. The petitioners before the Court are constables of the civil police who have put in more than 10 years of service. The orders which they have challenged are orders of transfer from the civil police to the Government railway police. Hence, the first question which has been framed for the decision of the Full Bench arises from the submission of the petitioners that constables of the civil police who have put in more than ten years' service cannot be transferred to the Government railway police.

5. The first paragraph of Regulation 525, inter alia, stipulates conditions of transfer of constables from the civil police to the armed police and vice versa in a situation where they have put in varying period of service, these being (i) service of not less than two years; (ii) service of more than two years but less than ten years. Where a constable has put in less than two years of service, Regulation 525 enables his transfer from the civil police to the armed police or vice versa, the condition being that the transfer has to be by the Superintendent of Police. Where a civil police constable has put in more than two years' service but less than ten years of service, Regulation 525 provides for two situations of transfer: depending upon the period of transfer, the power to effect the transfer is conferred either upon the Superintendent of Police or, as the case may be, on the Deputy Inspector General. Where the transfer is for a period not exceeding six months for any one year, the power to make the transfer is conferred upon the Superintendent of Police. Where, however, the transfer is to the other branch of the force and it is proposed to transfer a civil police constable for any period, meaning thereby a period in excess of six months in a year, the stipulation is that the permission of the Deputy Inspector General must be obtained. Hence, where the term of service which has been put in by a police constable is less than two years, the Superintendent has the power to transfer such a person from the armed to the civil police and vice versa. Where the period of service of a civil police constable is of more than two years but less than ten years, it is again the...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT