Disposed

Om Prakash v. State of U P and 4 Others

Allahabad HC7 Sept 2022WRIA/12907/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a writ petition seeking to quash a transfer order without deciding on merits. The court directed the competent authority to reconsider the petitioner's case sympathetically, considering his imminent retirement and wife's illness, within four weeks.

What did the court decide?

Disposed with liberty to file representation; set to be decided by authority within four weeks.

Om Prakash Vs State of U P and 4 Others — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 32

¶2

Case :- WRIT - A No. - 12907 of 2022

¶3

Petitioner :- Om Prakash Respondent :- State Of U P And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Qazi Vakil Ahmad Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶4

Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the State.

¶6

By means of this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari to quash transfer order dated 28.6.2022 passed by respondent No.4 as regards the petitioner and subsequent order, Annexure No.1.

¶7

A further prayer to direct the concerned authority to decide representation dated 29.6.2022 of the wife of the petitioner has also been made.

¶8

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that by the order impugned, the petitioner has been transferred to Tehsil Bilhaur from Tehsil Sadar, Kanpur Nagar. It is submitted that as per 5(vii) of transfer policy dated 15.6.2022, the posting of group C employees who are going to retire within two years shall be considered as far as possible to their home district. It is submitted that the petitioner is due to superannuate on 23.12.2023, i.e. within two years and as such, he should not have been transferred by the authorities in the light of the aforesaid transfer policy.

¶9

It is further submitted that the petitioner's wife is seriously ill and therefore, his transfer order is liable to be set aside.

¶10

After arguing for some time, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that it will be suffice if the

¶11

pending representation of the petitioner is decided by competent authority, to which learned Standing Counsel has no objection.

¶12

In view of the above, without entering into merit of the case, the petition is finally disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to move a fresh representation to respondent No.2/competent authority within two weeks from today. In case such a representation is submitted within the aforesaid stipulated time, respondent No.2/competent authority shall consider the case of the petitioner sympathetically keeping in view that he has to retire from service next year as also his wife is seriously ill, and decide it, by passing a reasoned and speaking order, expeditiously and preferably within the next four weeks.

¶13

Order Date :- 7.9.2022 kkb.

¶14

Digitally signed by KRISHNA KUMAR BARANWAL Date: 2022.09.07 13:30:39 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Om Prakash v. State of U P and 4 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Om Prakash v. State of U P and 4 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Subhawati Devi Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Sujeet Kumar Singh Vs State of U P and Another

Aayush Taumar Vs the Union of India and 4 Others

Gaurav Kumar Vs State of U P and 4 Others

Harpal Singh Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Sushil Kumar Mishra Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others