Heard Sri Ajit Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Kapish Srivastava, learned counsel for the respondent-Bank.
This court has passed order dated 26.07.2021 as under:-
"(i)1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Kapish Srivastava, learned counsel for the respondent - Bank.
2. By means of present writ petition, the petitioner is challenging the impugned order of transfer dated 24.05.2021, whereby he has been transferred from District Barabanki to State of Chandigarh after grant of promotion on the post of Manager Scale - II.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that order of transfer is contrary to the transfer policy of the Union Bank of India. He further submitted that same order of transfer was subject matter of challenge at High Court of Jaipur, State of Rajasthan, wherein interim protection was granted to the petitioner of that writ petition, which is annexed as Annexure-5 to the writ petition.
4. He further submitted that Hon'ble Madras High Court has also interfered in the order of transfer being contrary to the policy of the respondent - Bank. In the light of aforesaid, submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner has also been transferred contrary to the policy of the bank, therefore, he is entitled for grant of relief, as prayed in the writ petition.
5. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent - bank submitted that in the writ petition the petitioner has nowhere stated that vacancy on the post of Manager Scale - II is available in the zone, where he was working.
6. A query was made to learned counsel for the respondent - bank that whether he has any instruction in regard to existence of vacancy of the post of Manager Scale - II in the zone, where the petitioner was working, he requested for grant of two day's time to seek instruction in the matter and to place the same before this Court.
7. Prayer is allowed.
8. List / put up this matter as fresh after two days on 30.07.2021."
In compliance of the aforesaid order, learned counsel for the respondent-Bank has filed counter affidavit.
Learned counsel for the petitioner instead of filing rejoinder affidavit has submitted that the representation of the petitioner dated 29.5.2021 (Annexure No.7 to the writ petition) is still pending and has yet not been disposed of, therefore, a direction may be issued to the authority concerned to consider and decide the said representation of the petitioner, strictly in accordance with law by speaking and reasoned order.
Considering the aforesaid request of learned counsel for the petitioner, I hereby disposed of this writ petition at the admission stage without entering into the merit of the issue, directing the authority concerned to consider and decide the representation dated 29.5.2021 of the petitioner, strictly in accordance with law by a speaking and reasoned order, with expedition, preferably within a period of three weeks from the date of presentation of a certified/computerized copy of this order along with representation and the decision thereof be intimated to the petitioner forthwith.
Order Date :- 26.8.2021 Gaurav/-