Disposed

Yadav Kanchan Devi v. State of Up and 3 Others

Allahabad HC29 Jul 2024WRIA/11042/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought quashing of a transfer order due to changed family circumstances. High Court followed a recent precedent granting liberty to join the transferred place and file a fresh representation for nearby posting, disposing the petition without merits.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to join transferred place; liberty granted to file fresh representation for nearby posting within three weeks.

Yadav Kanchan Devi vs State of Up and 3… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:121025

¶2

Court No. - 7

¶3

Case :- WRIT - A No. - 11042 of 2024

¶4

Petitioner :- Yadav Kanchan Devi Respondent :- State Of Up And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Pramod Kumar Yadav,Ram Janam Shahi Counsel for Respondent :- Archana Singh,C.S.C.

¶5

Hon'ble Prakash Padia,J.

¶6

The petitioner has preferred present writ petition inter-alia with the prayer to quash the impugned order dated 19.06.2024 passed by respondent no.2-Secretary, Basic Education Board of U.P. at Prayagraj.

¶7

It is argued by counsel for the petitioner that though online application for mutual transfer has been submitted by the petitioner pursuant to the Government Order dated 02.06.2023 and on the basis of the same transfer order has been passed but due to change of circumstances now petitioner does not want to join his transfer place.

¶8

1. Counsel for the petitioner placed reliance upon a judgement and order dated 02.07.2024 passed in Writ A No.4844 of 2024 [Arpana Kumari (Arpana) Vs. State Of U.P. Thru. The Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Of Basic Education Lko. And 6 Others] . The order dated 02.07.2024 reads as follows :-

¶9

"1. Heard learned counsel for petitioner, learned State Counsel appearing on behalf of opposite parties 1,2 and 4, Mr. Ranvijay Singh learned counsel for opposite party No.3, Mr. Ravi Prakash Yadav learned counsel for opposite party No.5, Mr. Sunil Kumar Advocate holding brief on behalf of Mr. Udai Veer Singh learned counsel for opposite party No.6. In view of order being passed, notice to opposite party No.7 stands dispensed with.

¶10

2. Petition has been filed seeking challenge to the order dated 2nd June, 2023 and letter dated 19th June, 2024 issued by Basic Education Board, Prayagraj.

¶11

3. However after advancing arguments at some length learned counsel for petitioner does not wish to press the aforesaid prayers. It is submitted that although earlier petitioner had given consent for mutual transfer, in pursuance of which transfer order had been issued but subsequently due to family circumstances, it is not possible for petitioner to be posted at the place where earlier transfer has been sought. On the basis of instructions learned

¶12

counsel for petitioner submits that petitioner may be given liberty to move a fresh representation before the authority concerned for nearby posting to her earlier place of posting.

¶13

4. Considering innocuous prayer being made by learned counsel for petitioner and without entering into the merits of the case, it is directed that petitioner shall join at the transferred place on the basis of mutual transfer whereafter liberty is granted to petitioner to file a fresh representation before the authority concerned seeking fresh transfer. In case such a representation is filed, the same shall be considered and decided on merits in accordance with law within a period of three weeks thereafter.

¶14

5. With the aforesaid directions, the writ petition stands disposed of."

¶15

It is argued by counsel for the petitioner that since controversy involved in the present case is identical as in the case of Arpana Kumari (Arpana) hence petitioner is also entitled for the same relief.

¶16

Smt. Archana Singh, learned counsel for the contesting respondent has no objection.

¶17

Considering innocuous prayer being made by learned counsel for petitioner and without entering into the merits of the case, the present petition is disposed of directing the petitioner to join at the transferred place on the basis of mutual transfer whereafter liberty is granted to petitioner to file a fresh representation before the authority concerned seeking fresh transfer. In case such a representation is filed, the same shall be considered and decided on merits in accordance with law within a period of three weeks thereafter.

¶18

Order Date :- 29.7.2024 Pramod Tripathi

¶19

Digitally signed by :- PRAMOD TRIPATHI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Yadav Kanchan Devi v. State of Up and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Yadav Kanchan Devi v. State of Up and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shiv Murat Yadav vs State of Up and 2 Others

Shabana Aftab vs State of Up and 3 Others

Soniya Yadav vs State of Up and 2 Others

Narayan Das Arya vs State of U.P. and Another

Mohammed Salman Arfi and 156 Others vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Smt Ram Dulari Devi vs State of Up and 3 Others