Court No. - 5
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 9544 of 2019
Petitioner :- Kripa Shankar Yadav
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Kamlesh Kumar Yadav Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,A.S.G.I.
Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J.
Heard Sri Kamlesh Kumar Yadav, learned counsel for the petitioner, Ms. Deep Mala Srivastava, learned counsel for the respondent no.2 and Sri B.P.Singh Kachhawah, learned Standing Counsel for the respondent nos. 1, 3, 4 and 5.
The present writ petition has been filed against the transfer order dated 27.05.2019 passed by the respondent no.3-Addl. Director General, NCC, Directorate, Lucknow transferring the petitioner from 92 U.P. Bn. NCC, Ghazipur to 85 U.P. Bn. NCC, Shamli.
It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that his wife is a heart patient and there is no one to look after her and further he has been transferred at a place which is 1000 Kms. away from his present place of posting.
It is not in dispute that the petitioner holds a transferable post and is posted at Ghazipur since 2003. It is a settled law that transfer is an exigency of service. Ordinarily the Court should not interfere in the matter of transfer except on the limited grounds i.e. violation of statutory rules and malafide. Violation of transfer policy or executive order does not confer any vested right on the employee to challenge the transfer order in the Court. Reference may be made to the judgments of the Supreme Court in Union of India and others v. S.L. Abbas, (1993) 4 SCC 357; Shilpi Bose (Mrs.) and others v. State of Bihar and others, 1991 Supp 2 SCC 659; and, N.K. Singh v. Union of India and others, (1994) 6 SCC 98.
From a perusal of the pleadings of the writ petition and from the submission made across the bar, learned counsel for the petitioner has failed to point out any violation of statutory provision or service rules.
In view of the above, the Court is not inclined to interfere with the transfer order in exercise of its discretionary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. However, it is open to the petitioner to approach the competent authority by filing a representation, which shall be considered and decided on merits by a reasoned and speaking order as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of two months from the date of filing of a certified copy of this order alongwith copy of the writ petition.
It is made clear that the representation of the petitioner shall be considered after the petitioner reports at the transferred place.
The writ petition is, accordingly, disposed off. Order Date :- 10.6.2019 Lbm/-