S.P.Srivastava, J. - (1.) THE petitioner, a member of a disciplined force, who holds the post of an Inspector (Civil Police) was transferred from district Mirzapur to Meerut Zone by, an order passed by the inspector-General of Police, dated 28-2-1994. This order was sought to be implemented by the Superintendent of Police, Mirzapur, vide his order, dated 26-2-1994. Feeling aggrieved the petitioner has approached this court seeking redress praying for the quashing of the order transferring him from Mirzapur.
(2.) I have heard Shri R. P. Tripathi, the learned Counsel for the peti tioner and the learned Standing Counsel representing the respondents as well as Sri S. P. Singh, Advocate who represents the respondent No. S and have carefully perused the record. It appears that Ram Raj Singh, the respondent No. 5 was involved in case crime No. 217/1991 under Section 353 I. P, C. and 124, 129(iii), 130 (ii), 132 (iii) and 124-A and 136 (2), Peoples Representation Act as well as in case crime Nos. 204 and 204-A of 1993 under Section 395/337, I.P.C. and had also been arrested by the petitioner in case crime No. 204 and 204-A of 1993. The aforesaid respondent had been arrested by the petitioner on 25-5-1995. The petitioner has asserted that the aforesaid Ram Raj Singh along with his supporters made a request to Sri Ram Lakhan Verma, State Minister (Panchayat) on 27-1-1994 to transfer him from Mirzapur and it was on the recommendation made by Sri Verma that the impugned order of transfer had. been passed against him. It has been further assented that the impugned order has been passed on the basis of casteisra and political pressure and was mala fide, arbitrary and illegal. It has also been asserted that the aforesaid order is in flagrant: disregard of the provisions contained in paras 520 and 524 of the U. P. Police Regulations.
(3.) THE claim of the petitioner has been contented by the respondents No. 1 to 4 denying the allegations made by the petitioner and asserting that the transfer order in question had been passed against him on account of administrative exigencies. It has also been asserted by the learned Standing Counsel that in the facts and circumstances of the present case the provisions contained in paras 520 and 524 of the U. P. Police Regulations are not at all attracted and no ground at all has been made out for any interference by this Court while exorcising the extraordinary jurisdiction envisaged under Article 226 of the Constitution of India The learned Counsel for the petitioner has urged that the impugned order stands vitiated on account of mala fide. The only assertion made in this regard in the writ petition is that the Inspector-General of Police, Lucknow had passed the aforesaid order on the recommendation of Sri Ram Lakhan Verma, the State Minister (Panchayat), U. P. Although the petitioner has alleged mala fide against the Inspector General of Police, impleaded in his official capacity as respondent No. 2, who had passed the impugned order of transfer he has not cared to implead the said respondent co-nominee in his personal capacity. Even Sri Ram Lakhan Verma, the State Minister (Panchayat) who is alleged to have recommended for the petitioner's transfer from Mirzapur has act been impleaded as a respondent in the writ petition.;