Court No. - 36
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 10435 of 2018 Petitioner :- Jai Govind Yadav Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ram Prasad Dubey,Manoj Kumar Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Mrs. Sunita Agarwal,J.
By means of the present petition, the petitioner is challenging the transfer order dated 13.03.2018 on the ground that the transfer of the petitioner has been made on political pressure. With reference to page '41' of the paper book, it is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that copy of the transfer order has been sent to the Personal Secretary, Deputy Chief Minister, who is in-charge of the Public Work Department, U.P., Lucknow. The said fact itself indicates that the transfer order has been made on political pressure.
However, apart from the said document, no other material has been brought on record to indicate that the petitioner has been transferred on some political pressure. No-one has been impleaded by name neither any allegation of malafide have been levelled against anyone.
A further perusal of the record indicates that there are certain allegations against the petitioner of his working and on account of the agitation by the workers, a fact finding enquiry has been initiated against the petitioner.
What is the outcome of preliminary enquiry conducted against the petitioner is not known. But from the facts brought before the Court, it is more than apparent that the petitioner had been transferred from Divisional office to office of Chief Engineer (Establishment) PWD, Lucknow by the order dated 28.12.2017.
In view of the enquiry going on against the petitioner, the transfer order was earlier cancelled vide order dated 02.02.2018 which has now been revoked by order dated 03.03.2018. It is not disputed that the petitioner is holding a transferable post. The assertion of the petitioner that the transfer order is malafide or it has been given effect during the course of departmental enquiry initiated against the petitioner is not substantiated from the record.
Even otherwise, the transfer is an exigency of service, this Court is not supposed to interfere in the decision taken by the administrative authority. Reference may be made to the judgement of Apex Court in the case of Shilpi Bose and others Vs. State of Bihar and others reported in 1995 (71) FLR 1011 (SC).
In view thereof, this Court does not find any reason to interfere.
Dismissed as such.
Order Date :- 24.4.2018 Himanshu