Dilipsinh Javansinh Rathod vs Director General And Inspector General, Gujarat State

Nikhil S. Kariel, J

Heard learned Advocate Mr.Ashish Dagli appearing with learned Advocate Mr.V. D. Chauhan for the petitioner and learned AGP Mr.Trivedi for the respondent State.

By way of this petition, the petitioner has challenged an order dated 26.3.2022 passed by respondent No.2 Superintendent of Police, Narmada, whereby punishment of reprimand has been issued to the petitioner. It also appears that as a consequence of the said order of punishment, the petitioner appears to have been transferred from Ahmedabad Commissionerate to District Narmada. Learned Advocate Mr.Dagli would also draw the attention of this Court to the representations preferred by the present petitioner dated 17.5.2022 and dated 12.9.2022, more particularly with regard to the transfer in question and whereas the petitioner also prays in the petition for a direction to the respondents to decide the same.

It would also appear, as per learned AGP Mr.Trivedi, that against the order impugned dated 26.3.2022 the petitioner has not availed the remedy of appeal/revision as available.

Considering the same, more particularly since it appears that the petitioner is also aggrieved by the order of inter-district transfer, the following directions at this stage would meet with the ends of justice and whereas learned Advocate Mr.Dagli has also consented to the same :-

4.1. The petitioner to prefer an appeal to the appellate authority within a period of 15 days from the date of receipt of this order, challenging the order dated 26.3.2022 and whereas the appellate authority shall decide the said appeal in accordance with law, without raising objection of delay, more particularly considering that the petitioner had preferred the present petition before this Court;

4.2. In case the petitioner is aggrieved by the order passed by the appellate authority, the petitioner is at liberty to prefer further revision as provided under the Rules. In case the petitioner is further aggrieved by the said order passed by the appellate authority, it is open for the petitioner to approach before the appropriate forum in accordance with the law.

4.3. Insofar as the inter-district transfer is concerned, the petitioner to prefer a representation to respondent No.1 DG & IG within a period of 15 days and whereas upon receipt of the representation the said authority shall take an appropriate decision in accordance with law within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of the representation.

4.4. Liberty is reserved in favour of the petitioner to challenge the said order, which would be passed by respondent No.1, if the petitioner is aggrieved by the same.

4.5. Needless to clarify that the Court has not gone into the merits of the matter.

With the above observations and directions, the present petition stands disposed of.