Dhirubhai Naranbhai Patel, J. - (1.) THIS Letters Patent Appeal has been preferred against the judgment and order delivered by the learned Single Judge in W.P.(S) No. 3951 of 2013 dated 17th June, 2014 whereby, the writ petition preferred by these appellants has been dismissed and therefore, the original petitioners have preferred this Letters Patent Appeal.
(2.) COUNSEL for the appellants submitted that the appellants were working in the Police Department as Inspectors at District Ramgarh. These appellants were transferred vide order dated 21st February, 2009 at CID, Ranchi. They had to immediately join the services at CID, Ranchi. In fact, they were waiting for their posting as earlier writ petition preferred by these appellants being W.P.(S) No. 958 of 2009, which was disposed of vide order passed by this Court dated 29th April, 2009. It is argued that the appellants are not at fault. These aspects of the matter have not been properly appreciated by the learned Single Judge and hence, the judgment and order delivered by the learned Single Judge in W.P.(S) No. 3951 of 2013 dated 17th June, 2014 deserves to be quashed and set aside. Counsel appearing for the respondent -State submitted that these appellants are working in a disciplined force i.e. Police and were working as Inspectors at district Ramgarh. They were transferred to CID, Ranchi vide order dated 21st February, 2009. Instead of joining at CID, Ranchi a writ petition was preferred earlier by these two appellants bearing W.P.(S) No. 958 of 2009 and had challenged the transfer order. No relief against the transfer order was given by this Court and the writ petition was disposed of by this Court vide order dated 29th April, 2009. Thereafter also these appellants had not joined the CID, Ranchi and therefore, they were suspended, chargesheet was given, Enquiry Officer was appointed and punishment of forfeiture of six increment for six months was inflicted upon the delinquent appellants. These details have been given in the counter affidavit filed by the respondents in the writ petition and it is further submitted by the counsel for the respondent -State that there is no fault in the enquiry. Neither the punishment can be labelled as unreasonably excessive nor it can be labelled shockingly disproportionate to the nature of misconduct. It is further submitted by the counsel for the respondents that the prayer made in the writ petition of these appellants was to the effect that the salary for the period running from 1st March, 2009 to 31st July, 2010 should be paid. Looking to the aforesaid aspects of the matter rightly the writ petition preferred by these appellants have been dismissed and no error has been committed by the learned Single Judge in appreciating these facts and hence, this Letters Patent Appeal may not be entertained by this Court.
(3.) HAVING heard counsel for both the sides and looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, we see no reason to entertain this Letters Patent Appeal mainly for the following facts and reasons: - - "(i) These two appellants are working in a disciplined force i.e. Police. They were Inspectors at the relevant time in the district of Ramgarh. They were transferred vide order dated 21st February, 2009 at CID, Ranchi. (ii) Instead of obeying the order of transfer, a writ petition was preferred by these two appellants being W.P.(S) No. 958 of 2009 in which no relief was granted either staying or quashing the order of transfer and the petition was disposed of vide order dated 29th April, 2009 (Annexure -1 to the memo of this L.P.A.). (iii) In view of this dismissal of the writ petition also, these appellants (original petitioners) had not joined CID, Ranchi, where they were transferred vide order dated 21st February, 2009. (iv) These two appellants as per their own whims, caprice and at the own parochial risk joined the duty at headquarter on 2nd May, 2009 whereas infact by the aforesaid transfer order dated 21st February, 2009 they were transferred to CID, Ranchi. Thus, they had joined the headquarter as per their own whimsical approach. This is not joining at all. This is also a disobedience of the transfer order. Such type of joining at headquarter is a clear defiance of the order passed by the headquarter of police at Ranchi. This is a grossest misconduct committed by these two Inspectors of Police. (v) These appellants were suspended, Enquiry Officer was appointed, enquiry was conducted at length. The charges levelled against them were proved and the disciplinary authority imposed punishment. All these orders including chargesheet etc. are annexed with the counter affidavit filed by the respondents in the writ petition. (vi) Thereafter, the writ petition was preferred by these two appellants being W.P.(S) No. 3951 of 2013 in which the prayer is to the effect that these two appellants (original petitioners) are entitled for salary for the period running from 1st March, 2009 to 31st July 2010 mainly on the ground that the appellants joined immediately the post where they were transferred, on the ground that they were waiting for posting, on the ground that earlier writ petition preferred by these appellants being W.P.(S) No. 958 of 2009 and also on the ground that the appellants are not at fault. None of these grounds are appealing to us and rightly not appealed to the learned Single Judge mainly for the fact that these two Inspectors of police are not obedient employees of the government in a disciplined force. They are indisciplined minded persons. There is no right vested in any employee to work at only one place, but, it is a right of the State that looking to the public exigency they can be transferred. These two appellants were transferred on 21st February, 2009 from district Ramgarh to district Ranchi. Instead of joining the post of CID, Ranchi they moved from pillar to post in the hopes that something will be done by somebody, but, nothing was done by anybody and ultimately, they were suspended and punished also. Evil of this type of indisciplined mind of these persons is absence from duties and when there is absence of duty, unauthorisedly, on a principle of "No work no pay", these appellants are not entitled to any salary for the period of suspension. The subsistence allowance has to be paid by the State as per the rules prevailing in the State of Jharkhand and if this subsistence allowance is not paid, we hereby, direct the State to make the payment in accordance with law, rules, regulations and government policies applicable to these appellants. Nothing more can be paid to these two appellants, much less, the salary for the period for which the prayer is made in the memo of the petition. Salary cannot be paid, but, subsistence allowance can be paid and as directed herein above, if the subsistence allowance is not paid the same will be paid within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order of this Court. (vii) The punishment order inflicted upon these two appellants which is dated 26th February, 2010 is never challenged by these two appellants/original petitioners. Thus, punishment has been accepted by these two appellants. We are not much going into the details, but, suffice it to say that very lenient view has been taken by the State for these two appellants to continue them in the job. In fact such type of behaviour and leniency sometimes, provides encouragement to others.";