- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:5821 WP No. 2802 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT WRIT PETITION NO. 2802 OF 2025 (S-TR) BETWEEN: MR. PRADEEP SINGH, S/O MR.GYANI RAM, AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, CISF UNIT, USRC SATELLITE CENTRE HAL ROAD, VIMANAPURA POST, BANGALORE - 560 017. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. EUGENE PRABHU BARRAT, ADVOCATE AND SRI.K.N.NAGARAJ, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. UNION OF INDIA, BY THE MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS, NORTH BLOCK, CENTRAL SECRETARIAT, NEW DELHI - 110 001. 2. THE OFFICE OF THE SENIOR COMMANDANT, CENTRAL INDUSTRIAL SECURITY FORCE UNIT ISAC, BENGALURU - 560 038. REPRESENTED BY ITS ASSISTANT COMMANDANT. Digitally signed by MARIGANGAIAH PREMAKUMARI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:5821 WP No. 2802 of 2025 3. THE INSPECTOR GENERAL, DAE AND DOS SECTOR, CISF COMPLEX, MAHIPALPUR, NEW DELHI - 110 037. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.SHANTHIBHUSHAN H., DSGI) THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE MOVEMENT ORDER DATED 17/01/2025 THROUGH DIG DOS ZONE-1 OFFICE FROM URSC(B) TO REPORT AT LPSC (VALIAMALA) THE MOVEMENT ORDER DATED 21/01/2025 UNDER E-38014/CISF/URSC(B)/ADM-I/IUT-24/M.O/2025-542 ISSUED BY THE SENIOR COMMANDANT CISF UNIT URSC BANGALORE UNDER THE AUTHORITY OF DIG CISF DOS ZONE- 1 HQRS BENGALURU POSTING ORDER NO.01/2025 ISSUED UNDER LETTER NO.E 38014 / CISF/DOS-I/ POSTING /ADM- 1/2025/388 DATED 17/01/2025 ON THE ADMINISTRATIVE GROUNDS. AS PER ANNEXURE-C QUA THE PETITIONER AND ETC., THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:5821 WP No. 2802 of 2025 ORAL ORDER Heard Sri. Eugene Prabhu.B. and Sri. K.N.Nagaraj, learned counsels for the petitioner and Sri. Shanthi Bhushan.H., learned DSGI for respondent Nos.1 to 3. Perused the writ petition papers. 2. The petitioner who is working as Sub-Inspector in respondent-Central Industrial Security Force Unit (for short 'CISF') is before this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to quash Annexure-C, Movement Order bearing No.E-38014/CISF/URSC(B)/ADM-I/IUT-24/M.O/2025- 542 dated 21.01.2025, relieving the petitioner from the Bengaluru Unit to report to duty at CISF Unit LPSC Valiamalai and praying for a writ of mandamus to comply with the Guidelines for Annual transfer under Annexure-A dated 02.01.2025. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that by impugned transfer, the petitioner would loose his seniority and it would affect his services and promotional opportunity. Further, learned counsel submits that the order of - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:5821 WP No. 2802 of 2025 transfer is in the nature of punishment transfer and as such the transfer needs to be interfered with. Moreover, he submits that while affecting the transfer of the petitioner, the respondent- Authorities have not followed the Transfer Guidelines. Hence, he prays for interfering with the order of transfer at Annexure-C and pray to continue the petitioner at Bengaluru Unit itself. 4. Learned DSGI submits that since the petitioner possesses functional expertise in Crisis Response Team and Space Technology, Drone Application Course and Counter Insurgency and Jungle Warfare Operations Course, his service is needed at transferred place i.e., Valiamalai. Therefore, he submits that the transfer of the petitioner is in the better administration and exigencies of administration of the respondent-CISF. He also invites attention of this Court to the affidavit dated 08.02.2025 of Senior Commandant of CISF and submits that the present transfer would not affect the petitioner in any manner and would also not affect his seniority for posting or promotion. Thus, he submits that there is no merit in the writ petition and pray for dismissal of the writ petition. - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:5821 WP No. 2802 of 2025 5. On hearing the learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of the writ petition papers, the only point which falls for consideration is as to "Whether the impugned order of transfer requires interference?" 6. Answer to the above point would be in the 'Negative' for the following reasons: Admittedly, the petitioner is working at CISF Unit URSC Bengaluru since May-2022. Affidavit of the Senior Commandant, CISF, filed today before the Court, Paragraph Nos.5, 6 and 7 reads as follows: "5. That it was further submitted before this Hon'ble Court that the petitioner possesses functional expertise in Crisis Response Team and Space Technology, Drone Application Course, and Counter-Insurgency and Jungle Warfare Operations Course, which makes his presence crucial at LPSC, Valimala in the prevailing security scenario. 6. That it is categorically stated that the transfer of the petitioner from Bangalore to Valimala shall, in no manner, affect his seniority for posting or promotion at any point in time. - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:5821 WP No. 2802 of 2025 7. That in compliance with the direction of this Hon'ble Court, the present affidavit is filed to reaffirm that the petitioner's transfer was made in the interest of administrative exigencies and that his seniority will remain unaffected." 7. The above affidavit makes it abundantly clear that the services of the petitioner as he possesses functional expertise in Crisis Response Team and Space Technology, Drone Application Course and Counter Insurgency and Jungle Warfare Operations Course are necessary at CISF Unit LPSC Valiamalai. It is also seen that the transfer of the petitioner would not affect the service condition of the petitioner in any manner. It is made clear that present transfer would not affect for posting or promotion of the petitioner. As the transfer of the petitioner from Bengaluru Unit to the CISF Unit LPSC Valiamalai is in the interest of administration and in the public interest, the same would not call for any interference. When the transfer is on the ground of necessity of the services of the petitioner as he possesses functional expertise and is in the interest of administrative exigencies, the same would not amount to punishment transfer as contended by learned counsel for the petitioner. Thus, I am of the view - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC:5821 WP No. 2802 of 2025 that there is no merit in the writ petition and accordingly, writ petition stands rejected. The petitioner is granted one week time from today to report to duty at transferred place. Sd/- (S.G.PANDIT) JUDGE SMJ List No.: 1 Sl No.: 37