Court No. - 33
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 9943 of 2021 Petitioner :- Bhanu Prakash Gupta Varishth Sahayak Gramin Abhiyantran Vibhag Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Rakesh Kumar Mathur,Ajay Kumar Goyal Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Ashwani Kumar Mishra,J.
This Court passed the following order on 12.08.2021:
"Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.
Present writ petition is preferred seeking following principal reliefs:-
"a. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned order dated 15.07.2021 passed by the respondent no.2 (Annexure No.10 to this writ petition) and relieving order dated 16.07.2021 passed by the respondent no.3 (Annexure No.11 to this writ petition) and all further proceeding consequent thereto.
b. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding and directing the respondents permitting the petitioner to work as Varisth Sahayak in Rural engineering Department 9R.I.U.) Mahoba as such and pay his salary month to month.
It has been stated that the petitioner was working as Senior Assistant in Rural Engineering Department, Chitrakoot Dham Division at Banda since the year 2018. The first transfer order has been passed on 28.6.2021 on the request of the petitioner transferring him from Banda to Mahoba as his wife is suffering due to paralytic attack and her treatment is going on at Mahoba. In pursuance of the aforesaid transfer order, he has joined at Mahoba on 13.7.2021. Just within two days' time again he has been transferred from Mahoba to Chitrakoot by the impugned order dated 15.7.2021.
Under the present facts and circumstances, prima facie, the Court is of the opinion that the impugned order is unsustainable.
On the request of Shri Suryabhan Singh, learned Standing Counsel the case is passed over to enable him to seek necessary instructions in the matter.
Put up this matter again as fresh on 18.9.2021.
Meanwhile, the respondents would be at liberty to consider the plight of the petitioner and rectify the situation."
Learned Standing Counsel points out that though petitioner was transfered from Banda to Mahoba, but it later transpired that petitioner has already worked at Mahoba for 18 years from 1998 to 2015. It is urged that in view of the transfer policy, the petitioner could not have been posted at Mahoba as he has already worked there for a period of 18 years. Petitione's working for 18 years at Mahoba is not disputed.
Since petitioner has already continued at Mahoba longer than the permissible stay at a district no exception can be taken if he is transferred to an adjoining district. Better medical facilities are reportedly available at Chitrakoot than what is available at Mahoba.
No interference is thus, warranted in the writ petition. Dismissed accordingly.
Order Date :- 7.10.2021 Pr/-