Allowed

Dr Shruti v. State of Up and 5 Others

Allahabad HC5 Aug 2024WRIA/10353/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition challenging rejection of transfer request on ground that current post was for OBC while petitioner was selected as SC candidate. Court held rejection unreasonable as petitioner belongs to SC and sought transfer to SC earmarked post, remanding matter for fresh decision.

What did the court decide?

Quashed impugned order and remanded matter to Director of Education for fresh decision.

Dr Shruti vs State of Up and 5 Others — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:132363

¶2

Court No. - 9

¶3

Case :- WRIT - A No. - 10353 of 2024

¶4

Petitioner :- Dr Shruti Respondent :- State Of Up And 5 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Hritudhwaj Pratap Sahi,Samarath Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶5

Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.

¶6

Heard Sri G.K. Singh, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Samarth Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Pradeep Singh, learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondent nos. 1 to 4.

¶7

Keeping in view the order proposed to be passed in the writ petition, issuance of notice to the respondent nos. 5 and 6 is hereby dispensed with.

¶8

By means of the instant writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has challenged the validity of an order dated 28.06.2024, passed by the Director of Education (Higher Education), Prayagraj, rejecting the petitioner's request for transfer from the post of Assistant Professor in Bipin Bihari Mahavidyalaya, Jhansi to Brahma Nand College, Kanpur, on the ground that the post on which the petitioner is working, is a post earmarked for a person belonging to 'Other Backward Classes' whereas the post on which she is seeking her transfer, is earmarked for persons belonging to Scheduled Castes, as per the 100 Point Roaster prepared in furtherance of Government Order dated 19.03.2021.

¶9

On the basis of written instructions provided by the Director of Education (Higher Education), the learned Standing Counsel has stated that the petitioner belongs to a Scheduled Castes and she was selected as a Scheduled Castes candidate. However, the post which she is presently holding is earmarked for a person belonging to Other Backward Classes as per the 100 Point Roaster, and, therefore, she can only be transferred to a post which is earmarked for a person

¶10

belonging to Other Backward Classes. It is not disputed that the petitioner belongs to a Scheduled Castes and she was appointed as such. The post to which she is seeking her transfer is also earmarked for a person belonging to Scheduled Castes category.

¶11

The Government Order dated 19.03.2021, provides that the person can be transferred to a post which is earmarked for the same category to which that person belongs.

¶12

As the petitioner indisputably belongs to Scheduled Castes category and she is seeking transfer to a post earmarked for persons belonging to that category only, the rejection of proposal for her transfer on the ground that presently she is holding a post earmarked for persons belonging to O.B.C. category, is unreasonable. Being a person belonging to Scheduled Caste category, the petitioner is entitled to be considered for transfer to the post which is earmarked for the same category.

¶13

Accordingly, the writ petitioner is allowed . The impugned order dated 28.06.2024, passed by the Joint Director of Education (Higher Education), U.P. on behalf of Director of Education (Higher Education), U.P., rejecting the proposal for the petitioner's transfer from Bipin Bihari Mahavidyalaya, Jhansi to Brahma Nand College, Kanpur is hereby quashed. The matter is remanded to the Director of Education (Higher Education), U.P. for being decided afresh, in accordance with law, keeping in view the observations made in this order.

¶14

[Subhash Vidyarthi,J.]

¶15

Order Date :- 14.8.2024 Ruhi H.

¶16

Digitally signed by :- RUHI HASAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Dr Shruti v. State of Up and 5 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dr Shruti v. State of Up and 5 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Rajesh @ Ajay Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko

Eraz Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko.

Rakesh Kumar Gupta Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Vedant Maurya @ Kumari Soni vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Technical Education Lko. and 2 Others

Mewa Lal Gautam vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Secrt. Govt. Lko.

Sandeep Maitee vs State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.