Dismissed

Deepak Sehra v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Public Works Lko. and 4 Others

Allahabad HC29 Jan 2024/556/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner challenged transfer and relieving orders in a writ petition. Court found the order, though mislabeled in one instance, merely implemented the promotion order petitioner had accepted, lacking sufficient merit for interference.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition for quashing the impugned order was dismissed.

What the court decided

Deepak Sehra Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy… — Service and Employment | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:8107

¶2

Court No. - 18

¶3

Case :- WRIT - A No. - 556 of 2024

¶4

Petitioner :- Deepak Sehra Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Public Works Lko. And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ashish Kumar Singh,Shakeel Qureshi Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶5

Hon'ble Manish Kumar,J.

¶6

The present writ petition has been preferred for quashing of the impugned dated 10.01.2024 passed by opposite party no. 2 whereby the representation of the petitioner against his transfer order dated 30.06.2023 and the relieving order dated 08.12.2023 has been rejected .

¶7

Learned counsel for petitioner has submitted that the impugned order dated 10.01.2024 passed by respondent no. 2 is without jurisdiction as a Committee has been constituted for taking decisions pertaining to the matters of transfer.

¶8

It is further submitted that the petitioner was not provided any information regarding the meeting held on 28.06.2023 for exercising options for place of posting.

¶9

It is further submitted that in the impugned order dated 10.01.2024, it has been mentioned that the petitioner has been transferred in public interest whereas in the impugned transfer order, it was mentioned that on the request, the petitioner was transferred from Agra to Kanpur.

¶10

On the other hand, learned State Counsel has submitted that there is no illegality in the orders impugned in the present writ petition. The petitioner, after the promotion from the post of Junior Assistant to Senior Assistant has been transferred and posted at a place where the post of Senior Assistant was vacant and required services of the petitioner in public interest.

¶11

After hearing learned counsel for the parties, going through the record of the case, it is found that earlier also, the petitioner had approached this Court by filing a writ petition against the transfer order dated 30.06.2023 and the relieving order dated 08.12.2023 by filing Writ-A No. 9737 of 2023. The said writ petition was disposed of vide judgment and order dated 19.12.2023 without entering into the merits of the case with a direction to the opposite party no. 2 i.e. Engineer-in-Chief (Development/Head of the Department, Public Works Department, Lucknow) to decide

¶12

the representation of the petitioner. The submission of learned counsel for petitioner is that the order dated 10.01.2024, passed by the Chief Engineer is without jurisdiction as the competent authority is the Committee constituted for the purpose of transfer by the State Government. The petitioner had not raised any objection at the time when the direction was issued by this Court in his earlier writ petition while providing for consideration of his representation by respondent no. 2, nor any review was preferred for the same.

¶13

The petitioner was promoted vide order dated 30.06.2023 on the post of Senior Assistant with a specific mention therein that posting order will be passed separately and petitioner has accepted the promotion with that condition and when the order of posting has been passed, the petitioner is challenging the orders for one reason or the other. Once the petitioner has accepted the promotion order, then he cannot challenge the posting order which was a part of the order promoting him. The mention in the impugned order of posting that it is on the request of petitioner, is incorrect but the conjoint reading of the promotion order dated 02.12.2022 and the impugned order dated 10.01.2024 shows that the petitioner has been posted and transferred at Kanpur Region on the post of Senior Assistant as the same was lying vacant and the services of Senior Assistant was required in public interest, therefore, there is no illegality in the orders passed and thus, requires no interference.

¶14

The writ petition being devoid of merits is hereby dismissed .

¶15

Order Date :- 29.1.2024 DiVYa

¶16

Digitally signed by :- DIVYA SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Deepak Sehra v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Public Works Lko. and 4 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Deepak Sehra v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Public Works Lko. and 4 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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Rajesh Chandra Mishra Vs Union of India Thru. Chairman Railway Board and C.E.O. Ministry of Railway New Delhi and 6 Others

Danveer Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home U.P. Lko. and 3 Others

Om Prakash Dubey and Another Vs State of U.P. through Prin. Secy. Tax and Registration U.P. Go

Pratima Sachan Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and 3 Others

Dhanesh Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Rural Development U.P. Lko. and 4 Others

Smt. Shanti Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy. Deptt. of Medical Health and Family Welfare and 4 Others