Disposed

Mohar Singh v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Excise Deptt. U.P. Govt.Lko. and 2 Others

Allahabad HC9 Aug 2024WRIA/1431/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Allahabad High Court, during the pendency of a writ petition challenging a transfer order, listed the case and granted a stay restraining the petitioner from being compelled to hand over charge in pursuance of an order passed by the Deputy Excise Commissioner.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner restrained from being compelled to hand over charge pursuant to the letter dated 21.02.2024 issued by the Deputy Excise Commissioner.

Mohar Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy… — Service and Employment | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Court No. - 18

¶2

Case :- WRIT - A No. - 1431 of 2024

¶3

Petitioner :- Mohar Singh Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Excise Deptt. U.P. Govt.Lko. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Birendra Kumar Yadav,Alok,Satendra Jaiswal Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶4

Hon'ble Manish Kumar,J.

¶5

Heard.

¶6

Learned Counsel for the petitioner has filed supplementary affidavit, which is taken on record.

¶7

Present petition has been preferred with the following main reliefs:-

¶8

I) To issue a writ, order or direction In the nature of Certiorari quashing the transfer order dated 18.01.2024 so far relate to the opposite party no. 3 to the place, where the petitioner is already working on the said post, where there is single post of Assistant Excise Commissiner, at Distillery Biswan, Sitapur, contained as Annexure no. 1 to the writ petitions.

¶9

ii) To issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding and directing the opposite parties to modify the transfer order dated 18.01.2024, so far relate to opposite party no. 3 in terms of the circular dated 21.12.2023 and further directed to the opposite parties not to disturb the petitioner in his transfer order dated 18.01.2023 and pay regular pay salary & allowances to the petitioner, in the interest of justice.

¶10

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that on 21.02.2024 after filing of the present petition, the Deputy Excise Commissioner has passed an order directing the petitioner to hand over charge to the respondent no. 3.

¶11

It is further submitted that the Deputy Excise Commissioner is neither appointing authority/transferring authority of the petitioner nor any order has been passed by the competent authority transferring the petitioner hence no such direction can be issued by the Deputy Excise Commissioner.

¶12

Learned Standing Counsel prays for and is granted three days' time to seek instructions in the matter.

¶13

List this case in the next week, as fresh.

¶14

In the meantime, petitioner shall not be compelled to hand over charge in pursuance to the letter dated 21.02.2024 issued by the Deputy Excise Commissioner.

¶15

Order Date :- 26.2.2024 Ashish

¶16

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

Mohar Singh v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Excise Deptt. U.P. Govt.Lko. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohar Singh v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Excise Deptt. U.P. Govt.Lko. 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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Munaa Lal Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Technical Education Lko. and 2 Others

Virendra Misra Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addil. Chief Secy. Bal Vikas Seva Avam Pustahar Lko. and 4 Others

Ranjana Pandey Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko and 4 Others

Mohar Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Excise Deptt. U.P. Govt.Lko. and 2 Others

Vijay Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Rural Development U.P. Lko and 5 Others

Om Prakash Narayan Verma Vs State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Panchayati Raj Civil Secrt. Lko. and 4 Others