THIRUVANANTHAPURAM:The transfer of 49 police personnel attached to the Special Armed Police (SAP) in Peroorkada to Rapid Response and Rescue Force (RRF) has kicked up a storm with allegations growing in strength that those who refused to take part in the government’s salary challenge were targeted and transferred as an act of vengeance. However, the police top brass rubbished the allegation, saying that the transfer decision was taken to provide adequate workforce to RRF that guards vital installations including the Secretariat and provide protection to VIPs.
About half of the personnel attached with the SAP battalion had refused to contribute their one-month salary to Chief Minister’s Distress Relief Fund. This was immediately followed by the transfer order. Some of the personnel who challenged the ‘salary challenge’ were also included in the transfer list, triggering the allegation that it was an act of vengeance.
However, the police top brass refuted the allegation as baseless. Armed Police Battallion DIG K Shefin Ahmed said the policemen, comprising 40 Civil Police Officers and nine havildars, were transferred on deputation basis so as to fill the vacancies in the RRF which has been entrusted with the duty of guarding installations and VIPs.
“RRF requires around 65 people to guard the government Secretariat. Since it was illogical to bring in people from other armed battalions and I always give preference to local officers, it was decided to take officers from SAP on deputation. Though the RRF is headquartered in Klari in Malappuram, these 49 officers won’t be required to move out of Thiruvananthapuram. They have been assigned duty at the Secretariat,” he said.
He added that out of nine havildars, seven have given their one month salary. “So there is no merit in saying that those who didn’t take part in salary challenge were targeted,” he said.Sources said this time around, while effecting transfers, some of the mid-level officers were also transferred, which was against the usual policy of sending away juniors. However, Shefin countered this, saying that that was not a rule, but an old custom, which need not be followed all the time.“Even then, we will look into it if the convention was broken,” he said.