- (1.) The action of the respondents in transferring the petitioner as Deputy Commandant of Border Security Force from HQ Punjab FTR to 91 Bn, has been challenged by him by way of the present petition.
(2.) It was submitted on behalf of the petitioner that he had been transferred from his present place of posting by disregarding the statutory provisions and the rules for transfer and, that too, within ten months of his posting. He has an unblemished record of service since his appointment from the year 1993. He had been working to the utmost satisfaction of his superior officers, where his work and conduct had been commended. He had been given responsible jobs/appointments, commensurate with his qualifications and rank. No departmental proceedings had ever been initiated or even contemplated against him. By dint of his work and dedication, besides fulfilling the requisite criteria and eligibility, he was able to obtain promotion as Deputy Commandant on 7.10.1998.
(3.) It was also submitted on behalf of the petitioner that he had done LL.B from Panjab University, Chandigarh and based on his said qualifications, he was given the appointment of Law Officer (Deputy Commandant/Litigation) by way of static posting in June 2006. As per Rule 5 of Border Security Force (Tenure of Posting and Deputation) Rules, 2000, his posting to static formation was to be for a period of three years and only thereafter he could be reverted to his parent battalion. Further, as per Rule 7, only those members of the force were eligible for posting to static formation, who were found suitable for the job, which suitability was to be assessed by the competent authority. All these formalities were duly complied with by the competent authority and it was only thereafter that the petitioner was appointed as Law Officer (Deputy Commandant/Litigation). Under these circumstances, when the petitioner had not completed the period of three years in static formation, he could not be transferred to his parent battalion. It was also contended on behalf of the petitioner that the impugned transfer order was passed on the basis of recommendation made by the Commandant for posting the Petitioner out from his present place of appointment, yet while approving the same, Director General did not pass a speaking order and simply approved the recommendation.;