CRPF personnel moves Delhi HC against new SCT policy, court seeks Centre's reponse

New Delhi [India], January 28 (ANI): The Delhi High Court has sought the response of the Central Government and Director General of CRPF on the petitions moved by three of its personnel against the new Summer Chain Transfer (SCT) policy introduced in September 2022.
The petitioners have been seeking their transfer as per the SCT policy mentioned in Standing Order dated December 29, 2016, because they were transferred to Hard Area vide order dated May 15, 2020, for a prescribed period of two years.
According to the new SCT policy mentioned in the standing order dated September 27, 2022, the prescribed period for service in the hard field area is increased from two years to three years.
The plea stated that the Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF) Director General and Centre Government have not contemplated the fact that the new standing order dated September 27, 2022, is retrospectively impacting the transfer of the petitioners and other personnel who got their transfer in SCT 2020 as criteria envisaged in old standing order as per which they got transferred is not being followed. Rather they were deprived of the policy benefits.
The Division Bench of Justice Suresh Kumar Kait and Justice Neena Bansal Krishna in an order passed on January 25, 2023, issued notice to the Central Government and CRPF and directed it to file an affidavit in this regard. The court has fixed April 6 for a detailed hearing in the matter.
The three petitioners were represented through Advocates Abhinav Garg, Anshul Kumar and Bhanu Pratap in the matter.
Petitioners Counsel Abhinav Garg submitted that because of SCT 2022 onwards, the respondents have introduced an online software named System For Annual Transfer Over Software (SANTOS) whereby the Summer Chain transfers will be done through SANTOS software. It is pertinent to mention that there is no provision to fill the Special cases for the petitioners and other personnel in the software and this issue was raised by the personnel before the respondents. However, no other provision has been made after that.
Advocate Abhinav Garg further submitted: "prescribed tenure of ministerial staff in duty Bn is for 2 years exist since long, due to limited staff and in order to rotate ministerial staff posted at other static areas. Due to the sudden change in the policy the petitioners and other personnel who got transferred in SCT 2020 were impacted as may have to served for 4 years in the SOZ or Hard Field Area. That this transition from old to new policy will deprive and detriment the petitioners and other personnel transferred in SCT 2020 from policy benefits as compare to other personnel. Whereas, personnel in the static/soft area availing their continuous posting in the static/soft location continuously for 6 years and more (i.e. more than 2 consecutive tenure of 3 years in soft area) by the way of transfer on the ground that non availability of vacancies in the hard/field area." (ANI)