Ghan Shyam Pandey Vs State of U.P. Prin. Secy. Revenue Deptt. Lko. and 2 Others — Allahabad HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

Ghan Shyam Pandey Vs State of U.P. Prin. Secy. Revenue Deptt. Lko. and 2 Others — Allahabad HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Liberty to move a fresh representation within 7 days before the competent authority / District Magistrate, Unnao enclosing earlier representations and relevant documents; direction to the competent authority to decide the representation by a speaking and reasoned order strictly in accordance with law within 15 days and communicate the decision forthwith; the transfer order was not interfered with on merits.

Issue for consideration

Whether the transfer order dated 2.7.2024 transferring the petitioner from Tehseel Unnao to Tehseel Safipur, said to have been passed without administrative reasons and despite his short stay at Tehseel Sadar, Unnao and his need to care for his ailing mother, should be interfered with. +1 more

Ratio / Principle

Without entering into the merits of the challenge to the transfer, the petitioner is permitted to move a fresh representation within 7 days before the competent authority / District Magistrate, Unnao, enclosing earlier representations and all relevant documents.

Key takeaways

The competent authority is directed to dispose of the petitioner's representation by a speaking and reasoned order, strictly in accordance with law, expeditiously within 15 days thereafter.ratio¶9
The competent authority shall communicate the decision on the representation to the petitioner forthwith.ratio¶10

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Transfer — Government servant (Lekhpal) transferred from Tehseel Unnao to Tehseel Safipur by order dated 2.7.2024 of Addl. District Magistrate, Finance and Revenue, Unnao — writ petition challenging transfer on grounds of short stay at Tehseel Sadar, Unnao (transferred there on 8.2.2024 after five years at Tahseel Hasanganj), absence of administrative reasons, and need to care for ailing mother — Court, without entering into merits, permitted petitioner to move a fresh representation within 7 days before the competent authority / District Magistrate, Unnao with earlier representations and documents — competent authority directed to decide the representation by speaking and reasoned order, strictly in accordance with law, within 15 days and communicate the decision forthwith — reliance by Standing Counsel on S.C. Saxena v. Union of India, (2006) 9 SCC 583 (join first, then represent) — writ petition finally disposed of.

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:46989

Court No. - 4

Case :- WRIT - A No. - 5156 of 2024

Petitioner :- Ghan Shyam Pandey Respondent :- State Of U.P. Prin. Secy. Revenue Deptt. Lko. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Amit Tewari,Kaustubh Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

Hon'ble Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.

Heard Sri Amit Tewari, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Diwakar Singh, learned Standing Counsel for the opposite parties.

By means of this petition the petitioner has assailed the transfer order dated 2.7.2024 passed by the Addl. District Magistrate, Finance and Revenue, Unnao, whereby the petitioner, who is serving on the post of Lekhpal, has been transferred from Tehseel Unnao to Tehseel Safipur. Learned counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that petitioner is looking after his mother, who is suffering from 'Cancer', while residing at Sadar, Unnao, and if he is transferred to Tehseel Safipur which is about 40 kms. away from Tehseel Sadar, Unnao he would not be able to take care of her ailing mother. He has further submitted that he has worked for five years at Tahseel Hasanganj and he has been transferred to Tehseel Sadar, Unnao on 8.2.2024, therefore, in short span he should not be transferred without having any reasons to that effect inasmuch as the transfer order has not been passed on administrative ground or for administrative reasons.

Learned Standing Counsel has opposed the aforesaid request and submitted that transfer is an exigency of service and if any employee is transferred from one place to another instead of challenging the same he /she should first submit his joining and only then he /she may prefer a representation to the competent authority, if he / she is having any bonafide. He has placed reliance on the judgment of Apex Court in re: (2006) 9 Supreme Court Cases 583 : S.C. Saxena vs. Union of India and others wherein para 6 the Apex Court has held that if any employee is transferred from one place to another, firstly he /she should submit his joining at the transferred place, thereafter he may prefer a representation to the competent authority ventilating his grievance and if such representation is preferred, the same may be considered and decided strictly in accordance with law.

Therefore, without entering into the merits of the issue, the petitioner is permitted to move a fresh representation within 7 days before the competent authority / District Magistrate, Unnao enclosing therewith earlier representations along with all relevant documents. If such a representation is moved the competent authority concerned is directed to dispose of the representation of the petitioner with speaking and reasoned order, strictly in accordance with law expeditiously, say within a period of 15 days thereafter.

The competent authority shall communicate the decision on the representation to the petitioner forthwith.

Writ petition is finally disposed of .

[Rajesh Singh Chauhan, J.]

Order Date :- 10.7.2024 Om

Digitally signed by :- OM PRAKASH MISHRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench