ASHOK BHUSHAN,J. - (1.) HEARD Smt. Kamla Singh, counsel for the petitioner, and Sri S.K. Rai appearing for the respondents. Counter and rejoinder affidavits have been exchanged and the writ petition is being finally disposed of according to Rules of the Court.
(2.) BY this writ petition, the petitioners have prayed for quashing the order dated 5th February, 2002 passed by the Director General, Central Reserve Police Force refusing the prayer of the petitioners for cancellation of the transfer order and directing posting of the petitioners accordingly. A writ of mandamus has also been sought for directing the respondents not to interfere in working of the petitioners in Group Centre, C.R.P.F., Allahabad. The facts of the case as given in the writ petition are; Petitioner No. 1 and Petitioner No. 2 both are working in Central Reserve Police Force. Petitioner No. 1 is wife whereas petitioner No. 2 is husband. Both the petitioners had been posted at Group Centre, Central Reserve Police Force, Allahabad. It is stated that petitioners have one daughter of 11 months old. It is claimed that by office memorandum dated 3rd April, 1987 Government of India, Ministry of Home Affairs has issued guidelines for posting husband and wife at the same station. By an order dated 9th July, 2001 it was directed that Petitioner No. 1 is transferred from Group Centre, Allahabad to Battalion 135. The Petitioner No. 1 filed an application for cancelling the aforesaid transfer order in view of the guidelines issued by the Central Government that husband and wife be posted at the same station. A Writ Petition No. 29143 of 2001 (Nishi Dobriyal v. Director General, Central Reserve Police Force) was filed by Petitioner No. 1 challenging the transfer order dated 9th July, 2001. The said writ petition was dismissed with the observation and direction that petitioner may file a fresh comprehensive representation before the concerned authority who shall decide the same within three weeks on receipt of certified copy of the order. Copy of the said judgment of this Court dated 6th August, 2001 has been annexed as Annexure -3 to the writ petition. After the aforesaid order of this Court was submitted by the petitioner before the Director General, an order has been passed on 5th February, 2002 rejecting the request of the petitioner for cancellation of transfer order. The said order dated 5th February, 2002 has been challenged by the petitioners in the present writ petition. By order dated 5th February, 2002, the husband of the petitioner was directed to be posted in Battalion No. 117 being his parent unit.
(3.) THE counsel for the petitioner submitted that transfer order of the Petitioner No. 1 as well as the order dated 5th February, 2002 is not a valid order. It has been submitted by the petitioners that according to various standing orders issued by the Director General, Central Reserve Police Force husband and wife has to be considered for posting on same place/station. Reference has been made to Standing Order No. 3/99, Standing Order No. 3/99 contain following guidelines: (d) Husband and wife serving in the Force shall, as far as possible, be considered for posting on same place/station. Administrative requirement/exigencies of service will however, prevail. Almost to the same effects are the Standing Orders No. 10/2001 and 29/2001. The last standing order No. 29/2001 provides : (xii) Husband and wife serving in the Force shall, as far as possible, be considered for posting to same place/station and within the constraints of administrative and operational feasibilities. The counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the transfer orders of the petitionesr sending them to different stations is violative of aforesaid standing orders and hence illegal. The counsel for the petitioner has also placed reliance on judgment of the Apex Court reported in 1993(4) SCC 25; Home Secretary U.T. of Chandigarh and another v. Darshjit Singh Grewal and others, and judgment of this Court reported in 1996 (1) Education Service Cases 148, Smt. Deepa Vishishtha v. State of Uttar Pradesh and others, and Division Bench judgment of this Court in Special Appeal No. 1087 of 2001 copy of which has been annexed as Annexure R.A. -2 to the rejoinder affidavit. ;