Can’t interfere in transfer of police officers, says HC

Dismissing the plea moved by sub-inspector R Anitha, Justice S M Subramaniam said constitutional courts interfering with administrative transfers, especially in uniformed services, would paralyse the administration of forces.

The court pointed out that an amount of control by the higher officials are required for uniformed services, said the judge, adding that the constitutional courts should consider these aspects while exercising the powers of judicial review under Article 226 of the Constitution. “Hence, whenever an order of transfer is under challenge, courts also must be cautious and exercise restraint in interfering with such orders of administrative transfers.”

Justice Subramaniam also held that transfer was incidental and a condition of service. “A public servant is supposed to serve wherever he/she is posted in the interest of public and for the welfare of public administration.” Transfer, he added, was not only an administrative necessity but required to avoid all sort of familiarity of these public officials with the public of that locality.

Since being recruited as sub-inspector in 2012-13, she had worked in the police stations at Ice House, Mylapore and Marina, Anitha said in the petition. She was working in Kottupuram police station during 2014-17, from where she was moved to Ennore. Aggrieved by this, she had moved the court.

Expressing surprise as to how the official could serve within Chennai for many years without any valid reason, the judge said, “If a public servant is allowed to work in a same station, more specifically, the uniformed personnel for many years, then they will develop a sort of familiarity in the locality and it may lead to several other problems including the maintenance of police force by the superior officials,” Justice Subramaniam added.