Disposed

Dharmendra Singh v. State of U.P. and 3 Ors.

Allahabad HC14 Sept 2018SPLAD/626/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This special appeal was allowed regarding condonation of delay. The special appeal was disposed of by directing the appellant to file a representation to the competent authority to address the grievance without the single bench order acting as an impediment.

What did the court decide?

Appellant given liberty to file a representation to competent authority; existing order not to act as impediment.

Dharmendra Singh Vs State of U.P. and 3 Ors. — Service and Employment | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 21

¶2

Case :- SPECIAL APPEAL DEFECTIVE No. - 626 of 2018

¶3

Appellant :- Dharmendra Singh Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Ors Counsel for Appellant :- Virendra Singh,Lal Ji Pandey Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶4

Hon'ble Govind Mathur,J. Hon'ble Chandra Dhari Singh,J.

¶5

This appeal is barred by limitation from 33 days.

¶6

Having considered the facts stated in the application seeking condonation of delay, we are satisfied that the appellant had justifiable reason to state that for a bonafide reason, he was prevented from filing the appeal in time, accordingly, the delay in filing the appeal is condoned.

¶7

Under an order dated 31st May, 2018, the appellant-petitioner has been transferred from the office of Regional Employment Office, Agra to the Regional Employment Office, Etah in administrative exigency.

¶8

The case of the appellant-petitioner is that the transfer aforesaid is bad in view of clause 13 of the applicable transfer policy dated 29th March, 2018. Learned single Bench dismissed the petition for writ by arriving at the conclusion that "petitioner holds a transferable post, and is otherwise continuing at the same station for last 20 years. Transfer is an incidence of service. In such circumstances, no case for interference to the order of transfer is made out".

¶9

Learned counsel for the appellant-petitioner states that learned single Bench has not considered the effect of clause 13 of the transfer policy according to which, an office bearer of a recognized association of the union of the employees cannot be transferred for a period of two years from the date he occupied an office with the association or union. The appellant-petitioner is holding the office of President of the employees association and, therefore, his transfer could have not been effected in light of the transfer policy.

¶10

Having considered all facts of the case, we deem it appropriate to dispose of this appeal by keeping the appellant-petitioner at liberty to get his grievance addressed by submitting a representation to the competent authority- Director of Employment with all his submission and while considering the

¶11

representation, if submitted by the appellant-petitioner, the order passed by the learned single Bench shall not be an impediment in that.

¶12

With the aforesaid observations, the special appeal stands disposed of.

¶13

Order Date :- 14.9.2018 Bhaskar

¶14

(Chandra Dhari Singh, J.) (Govind Mathur, J.)

Dharmendra Singh v. State of U.P. and 3 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dharmendra Singh v. State of U.P. and 3 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ram Singh Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Praveen Kumar Vs State of U.P. and 5 Ors.

Pankaj Shukla Vs State of U.P. and Another

Daya Shankar Tiwari Vs Dist. Inspector of Schools and 2 Ors.

Smt. Premlata Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Rakesh Kumar Ram Vs State of U.P. and 2 Ors.