Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010012692025 2025:GAU-AS:1170 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/320/2025 DR API BAGRA DAUGHTER OF DAKTUM BAGRA, RESIDENT OF HOUSE NO. 02, ADI COLONY, MIAO CIRCLE, P.O AND P.S. MIAO, DISTRICT- CHANGLANG, ARUNACHAL PRADESH PIN 792122 VERSUS THE UNION OF INDIA AND OTHRS REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS, NEW DELHI - 110001. 2:DIRECTOR GENERAL CRPF BLOCK NO. 1 CGO COMPLEX LODHI ROAD NEW DELHI-110003. (MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS) 3:THE SPECIAL DIRECTOR GENERAL NORTH EAST ZONE 9 MILE GROUP CENTRE CRPF GUWAHATI 4:THE INSPECTOR GENERAL CRPF JORHAT SECTOR POLICE COMPLEX ROWRIAH JORHAT ASSAM. 5:THE DEPUTY INSPECTOR GENERAL Page No.# 2/4 RANGE KHATKHATI RANGE HEADQUARTER CRPF GAUTAM BASTI KHATKHATI ASSA Advocate for the Petitioner : SADIKA YESMIN, MR P R SARMA,MR. H ALI,MS J A RAHMAN,PANKAJ DAS,SIRAJ CHOUDHURY,MR K THAKUR,B ALI SK,MR U PANDEY Advocate for the Respondent : DY.S.G.I., MS. B SARMA (C.G.C) BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN DEV CHOUDHURY ORDER Date : 05.02.2025 Heard Mr. P R Sarma, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Ms. B Sarma, learned CGC for the respondents. This writ petition is filed by the petitioner putting to challenge the transfer order dated 03.01.2025 issued by the respondent no.1, whereby the petitioner, who is a Chief Medical Officer (CMO)(SG) in the Central Reserve Police Force, who is posted at Golaghat, Assam has been transferred to 036-BN, Khonsa in the State of Arunachal Pradesh. The petitioner is aggrieved by rejection of her representation dated 06.01.2025 submitted before the Inspector General of Police (PERS) Directorate, CRPF, CGO Complex, New Delhi with a request to defer the transfer order by 3 (three) months in view of the ensuing final Board examination of her son scheduled to be held in the 3rd week of March, 2025. Ms. B Sarma, learned CGC in terms of this court’s earlier Page No.# 3/4 order dated 23.01.2025 submits that she has instructions that in the meantime the petitioner may join and thereafter the employees will consider her case. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is seeking deferment of her transfer till 31.03.2025 for the reason of her son’s examination. Referring to the determination made by the hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Director of School Education Madras and Others Vs. O Karuppa Thevan and Another reported in 1994 Supp (2) SCC 666, the learned counsel submits that in view of the petitioner’s children studying in school, the respondents as Model employer should have considered her prayer for deferment of the transfer till 31.03.2025. This matter was filed in the month of January, 2025 and the petitioner only seeks deferment of her transfer till 31.03.2025 and the learned counsel for the petitioner on instructions submits that the petitioner shall join in her place of posting on 01.04.2025. Considering such submission, this court is of the opinion that though the petitioner is not having any right to continue in the place of posting, however, at the same time, the respondents as Model employer, should have considered her limited prayer, inasmuch as she only seeks deferment of the transfer for temporary period till 31.03.2025. In view of the aforesaid and considering the nature of grievance, this court is the view that the writ petition be allowed by providing that the impugned transfer order dated 31.01.2025 issued Page No.# 4/4 by the respondent No.1 shall not be given effect to till 31.03.2025 and the petitioner shall join her place of posting on 01.04.2025. Ordered accordingly. The writ petition stands closed. JUDGE Comparing Assistant