Disposed

Yogendra Singh v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Allahabad HC21 Sept 2023WRIA/14814/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a transfer petition concerning a judge. While challenging a transfer order was deemed inapplicable, the court allowed the petitioner to seek relief on compassionate grounds based on his mother's medical condition pending further representation.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to submit representation with medical prescriptions; coercive action stayed pending decision.

Yogendra Singh Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others — Service and Employment | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:182989

¶2

Court No. - 37

¶3

Case :- WRIT - A No. - 14814 of 2023

¶4

Petitioner :- Yogendra Singh Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Arvind Srivastava Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Ashish Mishra,Bushra Maryam

¶5

Hon'ble Abdul Moin,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for respondent no.1 and Ms. Bushra Maryam, learned counsel for respondents no.2 and 3.

¶7

With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the writ petition is being finally decided.

¶8

At the very outset, Sri Arvind Srivastava, learned counsel for the petitioner, states that he does not intend to press the challenge to the transfer order dated 07.08.2023, a copy of which is Annexure-4 to the writ petition, but prays that as petitioner's mother is suffering from cancer and by means of impugned order dated 07.08.2023 the petitioner has been transferred from Amroha judgeship to Jaunpur judgeship and as the petitioner's mother is undergoing treatment of cancer at AIIMS, New Delhi consequently the respondents be directed to consider the case of the petitioner for being posted at any place closer to New Delhi so that there is no disruption in the medical treatment of the petitioner's mother.

¶9

In this regard, learned counsel for petitioner states that the petitioner would be willing to submit a representation along with all medical prescriptions indicating the medical treatment of his mother for cancer at AIIMS New Delhi and prays that the competent authority be required to consider the same in accordance with law sympathetically.

¶10

To the said prayer, learned counsel for the respondents no.2 and 3 has no objection.

¶11

Considering the aforesaid, the writ petition is disposed of leaving it open to the petitioner to submit a comprehensive representation to the competent authority duly annexing medical prescriptions of treatment of his mother at AIIMS New Delhi for

¶12

the purpose of indicating the treatment of cancer within a period of two weeks' from today along with certified copy of this order. In case such a representation is submitted within the time specified then the competent authority shall proceed to consider the petitioner's representation for transfer at any place closer to New Delhi and decide the same in accordance with law within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of the said representation.

¶13

Also considering that the petitioner's mother's medical treatment is going on at New Delhi as such till the representation of the petitioner is decided no coercive action shall be taken against the petitioner in pursuance to the impugned transfer order dated 07.08.2023.

¶14

In case the representation is not submitted by the petitioner within the time specified then the benefit of this order would not be available to the petitioner.

¶15

Order Date :- 21.9.2023 A. Katiyar

¶16

Digitally signed by :- AMIT KATIYAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Yogendra Singh v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Yogendra Singh v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Naveen Kumar Sinha Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Chhabile Lal Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Dr Umesh Kumar Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Km. Raktima Sharma Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Anita Kumari Vs Union of India and 5 Others

Shiv Singh Vs the State of U.P. and Another