Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
  4. /
  5. 2021
  6. /
  7. January

Ashish Kumar vs State Of U P And Others

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|27 July, 2021
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Court No. -5
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 5074 of 2021 Petitioner :- Ashish Kumar Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Navin Kumar Sharma Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Akhilesh Chandra Srivastava,Arun Kumar
Hon'ble Saral Srivastava,J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for respondent nos.1 & 3 and Ms. Archana Singh, learned counsel for rest of the respondents.
2. The petitioner at present is working as Assistant Teacher in Upper Primary School, Loniyan Tola, Block-Belghat, District Gorakhpur. The petitioner pursuant to transfer policy submitted an online application seeking inter-district transfer from Gorakhpur. In the application of the petitioner, following preferences of districts have been given:-
3. However, the application of the petitioner has been rejected on the ground that there does not exist any seat at the preferential places where inter-district transfer has been sought by the petitioner.
4. Challenging the aforesaid order, learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that it is evident from the list uploaded on the website of Basic Education Board providing number of seats available for inter- district transfer in each district that 180 seats available at Hathras district and 330 seats available at Agra district. He has placed the list of inter- district transfer and on the basis of the said list, he contends that only 168 candidates have been transferred to Hathras and 309 candidates have been transferred to Agra. Thus, he submits that seats are still available at Hathras and Agra districts, therefore, the reason assigned for rejecting the request of the petitioner for inter-district transfer is not sustainable in law.
5. Mr. Archana Singh, learned counsel for the respondents on instructions submits that petitioner has secured less quality point marks than the cut off for concerned district, and therefore, the request of the petitioner for inter-district transfer has rightly been denied.
6. To the aforesaid submission, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that those candidates, who have secured less quality point marks than the petitioner had been transferred, and therefore, the objection raised by the learned counsel for the respondents is not tenable in law. He further submits that this objection has not been taken in the impugned order for rejecting the request of the petitioner for inter-district transfer.
7. Considering the nature of order being passed in the writ petition, this Court does not invite counter affidavit from the respondents.
8. From the record, it appears that there was 180 seats available for inter-district transfer in Hathras district and 330 seats available in Agra district, out of which only 168 seats have been filled in Hathras and 309 seats have been filled in Agra. Thus, it appears that there are still seats available in aforesaid two districts which are preferential places of petitioner.
9. It is relevant to mention that so far as the objection raised hereinabove by the learned counsel for the respondents that petitioner has secured less quality point marks than the cut off for the concerned district, and therefore, his request for inter-district transfer cannot be acceded to, the order impugned does not reveals any such ground in rejecting the request of the petitioner for inter-district transfer.
10. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice, this Court permits the petitioner to file a detail objection raising all his grievances before respondent no.2-Secretary, U.P. Basic Education Board, Prayagraj within a period of two weeks from today against rejection of his request for inter-district transfer. In case any such objection is filed by the petitioner, the respondent no.2 shall consider the decide the same within a period of one month thereafter.
11. The impugned order shall be abide by orders passed by the respondent no.2 on the objection of the petitioner.
12. The writ petition is disposed off subject to the observations made above.
Order Date :- 27.7.2020 Sattyarth
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Ashish Kumar vs State Of U P And Others

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
27 July, 2021
Judges
  • Saral Srivastava
Advocates
  • Navin Kumar Sharma