STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS versus KASHMIR SINGH AND ANOTHER ETC. ETC.

Citation: [2010] 11 S.C.R. 900 · Decided: 06-10-2010 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: MARKANDEY KATJU · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Judgment (excerpt)

[2010] 11 S.C.R. 900 
A 
STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS 
B 
V. 
KASHMIR SINGH AND ANOTHER ETC. ETC. 
(Civil Appeal No. 8690-8701 of 2010) 
OCTOBER 06, 2010 
[MARKANDf:Y KATJU AND T.S. THAKUR, JJ.J 
Service Law: 
C 
Punjab Police Rules, 1934 - r. 1.5 - Limits of jurisdiction 
and liability to transfer - Transfer orders of various police 
personnel of various grades from one district/range to another 
- Challenge to - Transfer orders quashed by High Court -
On appeal, held: Police establishment of a State constitutes 
one police force and its members are liable to be posted 
D anywhere in the State - Transfer can be done from one district! 
range to another and there is no absolute prohibition for doing 
so -
Transfer/posting of policemen should be left to the 
discretion of the State Authorities - Th'ey are the best to 
E 
F 
assess the necessities of the administrative requirements of 
the situation -
Transfer being an incidence of service and 
purely administrative matters, cowts should be very reluctant 
to interfere in transfer orders as long as they are not clearly 
illegal - Courts should maintain judicial restraint - Thus, order 
of High Court set aside - Judicial restraint - Administrative 
Jaw - Indian Police Act, 1861 - ss. 2 and 4. 
The respondents-Constables, Head Constables, 
Exemptee Head Constables, Assistant Sub-Inspectors 
and Sub-Inspectors, serving in various districts in the 
G State of Haryana were ordered to be transferred to other 
districts and ranges. The respondents challenged the 
transfer orders. The Division Bench of the High Court 
quashed the transfer orders. Therefore, the appellants-
State filed the instant appeals. 
H 
900 
STATE OF HARYANA AND ORS. v. KASHMIR SINGH 901 
AND ANOTHER ETC. 
Allowing the appeals, the Court 
A 
HELD: 1. A perusal of the relevant provisions of the 
Indian Police Act, 1861 clearly shows that the entire police 
establishment under the State Government is one 
integrated police force, though for better administration 8 
the State has been sub-divided into districts/ranges. Rule 
1.5 of the Punjab Police Rules, 1934 clearly shows that 
police officers constitute one police force and are liable 
to be posted anywhere in the State. Moreover, Rule 1.5 
also clearly .states that no sub-division of the force 
territorially or by classes, affects this principle. A plain C 
perusal of the shows that transfer can be done from one 
district to another district or even to another range, and 
there is no absolute prohibition for doing so. However, 
in such a case, the seniority of Constables and Head 
Constables at the district level and of ASls and Sis at the D 
range level is maintained in the parent district/range 
despite the transfer. Promotion/confirmation is also given 
strictly as per the seniority in the parent district/range 
level, as per Memo No. 43515-22/E-(lll) dated 10.8.2010. 
[Paras 12 and 13] [906-F-H; 907-A-B] 
E 
2.1 Transfer ordinarily is an incidence of service, and 
the courts should be very relur mt to interfere in transfer 
orders as long as they are not clearly illegal. In particular, 
transfer and postings of policemen must be left in the 
F 
discretion of the concerned State Authorities which are 
in the best position to assess the necessities of the 
administrative requirements of the situation. The 
concerned administrative authorities may be of the 
opinion that more policemen are required in any G 
particular district and/or range than in another, 
depending upon their assessment of the law and order 
situation and/or other considerations. These are purely 
administrative matters, and the courts must not ordinarily 
H 
902 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2010] 11 S.C.R. 
A 
interfere in administrative matters and should maintain 
judicial restraint. (Para 14) (907-C-E] 
B 
2.2,The High Court took a totally impractical view of 
the matter. If the view of the High Court is to prevail, great 
difficulties would be created for the State administration 
since it would not be able to transfer/deploy its police 
force from one place where there might be relative peace 
to another district or region/range in the State where 
there might be disturbed law and order situation and thus, 
the requirement of more police. The courts should not 
C 
interfere with purely administrative matters except where 
it is absolutely necessary on account of violation of any 
fundamental or other legal right of the citizen. After all, the 
State administration cannot function 

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.