Disposed

Anand Kumar Singh v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Allahabad HC7 Feb 2023WRIA/1514/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner challenged mid-term transfer citing medical emergency and alleged victimization. Court allowed petition for fixture representation before Respondent No.3 to examine transfer necessity and medical grievances, dismissing son's studies as a ground for interference.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner permitted to approach Respondent No.3 via representation to raise grievance and disclose practices regarding alleged corruption and transfer necessity in Jail Ghazipur.

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

¶1

Court No. - 52 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 1514 of 2023 Petitioner :- Anand Kumar Singh Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Shardendu Mishra,Jai Shankar Mishra Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶2

Hon'ble Vikram D. Chauhan,J.

¶3

Heard Sri Shardendu Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondents.

¶4

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is working on the post of Jail Warden and by impugned order, petitioner has been subjected to transfer from Ghazipur to Fatehgarh. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the wife of petitioner is suffering from Neuro problem and is under medical treatment. It is further submitted that son of the petitioner is studying and as such, transfer of the petitioner in mid term is not in consonance with the transfer policy. It is further submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is raising voice against the corruption that is prevalent in the Jail, Ghazipur and as such, he has been transferred.

¶5

The transfer is exigency of service. However, the employer is obliged under the law to look into the grievance of it's employee so that there is smooth functioning of the executive authority. The claim of the petitioner that the petitioner is raising voice against corruption in the Jail at Ghazipur is the incident on the basis of which, transfer has been effected.

¶6

Under the circumstances, petitioner is permitted to approach the respondent No.3 by means of a representation raising his grievance. The petitioner, if so, advised may also disclose the prevalent practice in the Jail at Ghazipur before the respondent No.3, who shall examine the same and shall pass a suitable order as to whether the transfer order has been made in exigency of service or the petitioner has been subjected to any victimization. The respondent No.3 shall also look into the grievance of the petitioner with regard to medical treatment of his wife.

¶7

Insofar as mid term transfer being challenged on the ground that the son of the petitioner is studying, it is to be seen that son of the petitioner is studying at Prayagraj and as such, the same itself cannot be a ground to interfere in the transfer order.

¶8

With the aforesaid observation/direction, the writ petition stands disposed of.

¶9

Order Date :- 7.2.2023 D. Tamang

¶10

Digitally signed by :- DHIRENDRA TAMANG High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Anand Kumar Singh v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anand Kumar 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

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shyampyare Chauhan Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Shamim Ahmad Vs State of U P and 2 Others

Shekh Abdul Mannan Vs State of U P and 2 Others

Gopal Gupta Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Dr.Prem Prakash Vs State of U.P. and Another

Apreksha Kumari Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others