Anita vs Union of India

ANITA vs Union of India

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided Jun 01, 2023

~4 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1364060

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1364060
Court: Kerala High Court
Judge: Honourable Mr.Justice N.Nagaresh
Decided On: Jun 01, 2023
Case Number: WP(C)/17749/2023

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

ANITA

Respondent

Union of India

Excerpt

.....to the 5th respondent to provide a copy of the preliminary inquiry conducted against lady constable, jaseena beevi on the complaint preferred by the petitioner; v. to issue such other reliefs as thishonourable court may deem fit and proper in the factsand circumstances of the case.2. it is submitted by the counsel for the petitioner thatas against ext.p6 order of transfer dated 23.05.2023, the petitioner has preferred ext.p7 representation to the 2 nd respondent. it is seen that the petitioner who was working as lady sub inspector in cisf unit, cochin international airport is now being transferred to airport at tirupathi. the petitioner would contend that the petitioner was not included in the list of general transfer earlier.3. the deputy solicitor general of india entered appearance and resisted the writ petition. according to thedeputy solicitor general of india, the impugned transfer orderis not by way of any revenge or victimisation. ext.p6 order has been issued for administrative reasons. as many as 92 other employees have been transferred as per ext.p6.4. heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned deputy solicitor general of india appearing for the respondents.5. the petitioner has preferred ext.p7 representationbefore the director general, cisf in the matter. taking into consideration, the facts and circumstances of the case, i am of the view that the 2nd respondent shall consider the representation submitted by the petitioner and take appropriate decision in the matter within a reasonable time. the writ petition is accordingly disposed of directing the 2nd respondent to consider ext.p7 representation and pass appropriate orders thereon as expeditiously as possible. the petitioner shall not be relieved from the existing station till a decision is taken as directed above. sd/- n.nagaresh judge ded appendix of wp(c) 17749/2023 petitioner exhibits exhibit- p1 a true copy of the circular no.22/2017 dated 25.09.2017 issued by the 2nd.....

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH THURSDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF JUNE 2023 / 11TH JYAISHTA, 1945 WP(C) NO. 17749 OF 2023 PETITIONER: ANITA AGED 27 YEARS, LADY SUB INSPECTOR/EXECUTIVE , NO.190200699, CISF UNIT COCHIN INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT, NEDUMBASSERY P.O, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, KERALA STATE, PIN - 683111. BY ADVS. T.SANJAY SANIL KUMAR G. RESPONDENTS:
1 UNION OF INDIA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS, NORTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI, PIN - 110 001 2 THE DIRECTOR GENERAL CENTRAL INDUSTRIAL SECURITY FORCE CISF HEAD QUARTERS, CGO COMPLEX, LODHI ROAD NEW DELHI, PIN - 110 003 3 THE INSPECTOR GENERAL/CISF AIRPORT SECTOR II, BANGALORE, KARNATAKA STATE, PIN - 560 300 4 THE DEPUTY INSPECTOR GENERAL/CISF APSZ HQRS, RAJAJI BHAVAN, BASANT NAGAR, CHENNAI, TAMILNADU, PIN - 600 090 5 THE SENIOR COMMANDANT CENTRAL INDUSTRIAL SECURITY FORCE , AIRPORT SECURITY UNIT, COCHIN INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT, NEDUMBASSERY P.O, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, KERALA STATE,, PIN - 670702
BY ADV SRI.S.MANU - DSGI THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01.06.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

JUDGMENT

Dated this the 1st day of June, 2023 This writ petition is filed seeking the following reliefs :

i. To declare that Ext.P6 Transfer Order

issued by the 4th respondent is illegal, arbitrary and violative of Ext.P1 Transfer Guidlines; ii. To declare that the petitioner is eligible to complete her remaining tenure in the present Unit allowed to her batch mates as provided in Ext.P1 Transfer Policy; iii. To issue a writ of Certiorari or other writ or direction to quash Ext.P6 Transfer Order transferring the petitioner from ASG Cochin to ASG Tirupathi; iv. To issue a writ of Mandamus or other writ or direction to the 5th respondent to provide a copy of the preliminary Inquiry conducted against Lady Constable, Jaseena Beevi on the complaint preferred by the petitioner; v. To issue such other reliefs as this

Honourable Court may deem fit and proper in the facts

and circumstances of the case.

2. It is submitted by the counsel for the petitioner that

as against Ext.P6 order of transfer dated 23.05.2023, the petitioner has preferred Ext.P7 representation to the 2 nd respondent. It is seen that the petitioner who was working as Lady Sub Inspector in CISF unit, Cochin International Airport is now being transferred to Airport at Tirupathi. The petitioner would contend that the petitioner was not included in the list of general transfer earlier.

3. The Deputy Solicitor General of India entered appearance and resisted the writ petition. According to the

Deputy Solicitor General of India, the impugned transfer order

is not by way of any revenge or victimisation. Ext.P6 order has been issued for administrative reasons. As many as 92 other employees have been transferred as per Ext.P6.

4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Deputy Solicitor General of India appearing for the respondents.

5. The petitioner has preferred Ext.P7 representation

before the Director General, CISF in the matter. Taking into consideration, the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the view that the 2nd respondent shall consider the representation submitted by the petitioner and take appropriate decision in the matter within a reasonable time. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of directing the 2nd respondent to consider Ext.P7 representation and pass appropriate orders thereon as expeditiously as possible. The petitioner shall not be relieved from the existing Station till a decision is taken as directed above. Sd/- N.NAGARESH JUDGE ded APPENDIX OF WP(C) 17749/2023 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit- P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE CIRCULAR NO.22/2017 DATED 25.09.2017 ISSUED BY THE 2ND Exhibit-P2 A TRANSLATED COPY OF HER COMPLIANT DATED 09.02.2023 ADDRESSED TO THE 5TH Exhibit-P3 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 11.04.2023 Exhibit-P4 COPY OF THE REMARKS OF THE 5TH RESPONDENT MADE ON 21.04.2023 IN THE ONLINE GRIEVANCE SYSTEM OF CISF Exhibit-P5 A TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 24.04.2023 Exhibit-P6 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.(2106) DATED 23.05.2023 ISSUED BY THE 4TH Exhibit- P7 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION 27.05.2023 ADDRESSED TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT SENT THROUGH DG'S E-MAIL

Same Court & Year Kerala · 2023 Same Parties ANITA vs Union of India Same Judge Honourable Mr.Justice N.Nagaresh