Disposed

Ajay Kumar Yadav v. State of U.P. and 5 Others

Allahabad HC6 Oct 2023WRIA/14958/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a writ petition challenging the cancellation of a transfer order. The judge found justification lacking for cancellation without reasons but imposed a stay conditioned on the petitioner furnishing an undertaking not to oppose future transfers.

What did the court decide?

Stay on cancellation orders conditional on undertaking not to oppose future transfers after academic year 2023-24; continuation at current post.

Ajay Kumar Yadav Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others — Service and Employment | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:192333

¶2

Court No. - 34

¶3

Case :- WRIT - A No. - 14958 of 2023

¶4

Petitioner :- Ajay Kumar Yadav Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 5 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Damodar Singh,Devendra Vikram Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶5

Hon'ble Ajit Kumar,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

¶7

Petitioner is aggrieved by the cancellation order dated 10th August, 2023, whereby his earlier transfer order dated 29th June, 2019 from Nalkoob Division Nanpara to Nalkoob Division, Sant Kabir Nagar had been cancelled and is also challenging the consequential order dated 17th August, 2023.

¶8

The argument advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner is that petitioner, who was transferred on his personal request from Nalkoob Division Nanpara to Nalkoob Division, Sant Kabir Nagar in the year 2019, was not averse to transfer to a new place as per the transfer policy but the grievance is that respondents quite unjustifiably cancelled the earlier transfer order issued three years ago without giving any opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.

¶9

He submits that, had this cancellation order not been in mid of academic year, he would have happily accepted the posting under the cancellation order but now his children have got admitted in the nearby school, it would be too difficult for him to make adjustment at transferred place. However, he submits that petitioner is ready to give an undertaking before the Executive Engineer, Nalkoop Division, Sant Kabir Nagar to the effect that he would not be opposing his transfer to any other place, if it is done next year in the month of April or on wards as authority may decide.

¶10

Learned Standing Counsel submits that petitioner can be transferred to a place by the administration in administrative exigency as well as in public interest and since he has already spent sufficient number of years, he cannot continue to remain at one particular station indefinitely.

¶11

Having heard learned counsel for the respective parties and having perused the records, I find that as a matter of fact the order dated 10th August, 2023 cancels order dated 29th June, 2019. I myself do not find any justification for cancelling such a three year old order without assigning proper reasons and, therefore, in the event respondents wanted to transfer the petitioner to another place, that could have been directed without seeking for cancellation of such earlier transfer order.

¶12

Now, since petitioner gives undertaking that he would not press for his continuance after the current academic year of his children is over and will be giving undertaking before the competent authority to that effect, this Court finds it appropriate to continue petitioner at Nalkoop Division, Sant Kabir Nagar till the end of current academic year of 2023-24.

¶13

In the circumstances, the order dated 10th August, 2023 and the consequential order dated 17th August, 2023 are kept in abeyance until the end of current academic year provided petitioner gives an undertaking to the Executive Engineer, Sant Kabir Nagar on or before 13th October, 2023 that he will not oppose his transfer to another place after the current academic year 2023-24, may be in compliance to the order dated 10th August, 2023 or any such other order that may be passed by the authority.

¶14

Petitioner shall continue to remain posted at Sant Kabir Nagar till the end of the current academic session or till the new transfer order is passed, whichever is earlier.

¶15

It is made clear that in the event petitioner fails to furnish such undertaking as directed hereinabove, the interim stay order upon the impugned orders shall stand discharged.

¶16

With the aforesaid observations and directions, this petition stands disposed of.

¶17

Order Date :- 6.10.2023 Atmesh

¶18

Digitally signed by :- ATMESH KESARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Ajay Kumar Yadav v. State of U.P. and 5 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ajay Kumar Yadav v. State of U.P. and 5 Others

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

Ashutosh Verma Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Ramesh Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Rita Devi Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Ram Khelavan Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Rashid Javed Vs Registrar General Allahabad High Court and 4 Others

Pramod Kumar Pandey Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others