Amita Yadav v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Basic Education Lko. and 2 Others

Allahabad HC7 Nov 2024WRIA/5051/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition against a mutual-basis teacher transfer order despite the petitioner's earlier withdrawal of her mutual transfer application, which under Board directions should have caused automatic cancellation of the transfer. The court found the submissions prima facie requiring consideration and stayed the impugned order till the next listing.

What did the court decide?

Stay of the impugned transfer order dated 13.06.2024 as regards the petitioner until next date of listing.

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

¶1

Court No. - 18

¶2

Case :- WRIT - A No. - 5051 of 2024

¶3

Petitioner :- Amita Yadav

¶4

Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Basic Education Lko. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ashutosh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Pradeep Tiwari

¶5

Hon'ble Manish Mathur,J.

¶6

Supplementary affidavit filed today on behalf of petitioner is taken on record.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for petitioner, learned State Counsel for opposite party no. 1 and Mr. Pradeep Tiwari, learned counsel for opposite parties no. 2 & 3.

¶8

Learned counsel for petitioner is granted liberty to implead the other transferred teacher as opposite party no. 4 during the course of day.

¶9

Issue notice to the newly impleaded opposite party.

¶10

Liberty is also granted to implead the U.P. Basic Shiksha Board through competent authority as opposite party no. 5 during the course of day.

¶11

Notice on behalf of aforesaid party has been accepted by Mr. Ran Vijay Singh whose name shall be printed whenever the case is next listed.

¶12

Petition has been filed challenging order dated 13.06.2024 whereby petitioner has been transferred on mutual basis.

¶13

It has been submitted that policy with regard to mutual transfers was effected in pursuance of Government policy whereunder petitioner applied for mutual transfer and was paired with the opposite party no. 6 but due to certain family circumstances, was compelled to withdraw his application for mutual transfer on 02.01.2024 which was sent through registered post to the concerned official but without considering the same, the impugned transfer order has been passed. Learned counsel has drawn attention to the order dated 12.01.2024 to submit that it has been clearly indicated that in case even after application for mutual transfer is made, one of the parties does not wish to be relieved, the transfer order would automatically stand cancelled. It is, therefore, submitted that once petitioner had exercised her

¶14

right to withdraw the application for mutual transfer, it was incumbent upon the opposite parties to have considered the same prior to passing of the impugned order of transfer particularly since such a direction has already been issued by the Basic Shiksha Board vide order dated 09.01.2024.

¶15

Prima facie submissions advanced by learned counsel for petitioner have force and require consideration.

¶16

Connect and list alongwith Writ-A No. 5175 of 2024

¶17

Till next date of listing, it is directed that the impugned order of transfer dated 13.06.2024 so far as it relates to petitioner shall remain stayed.

¶18

Order Date :- 2.8.2024 Satish

¶19

Digitally signed by :- SATISH KUMAR BHARATI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Amita Yadav v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Basic Education Lko. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Amita Yadav v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Basic Education 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

Rajni Yadav Vs State of U.P. Thru Secy.Basic Edu.Civil Sectt.Lucknow and Ors.

Akshay Veer Singh and Others Vs State of U.P.and Others

Ravi Shanker Mishra Vs State of U.P. through Secy. Secondary Edu. Lko. and Ors.

Ramashankar Baiswar vs Union of India Thru. Its Secy. Ministry of Communication, New Delhi and 2 Others

Ramai Ram vs Union of India Thru. Secy. Deptt. of Telecommunications Ministry of Communications and 2 Others

Sita Ram vs Union of India Thru. Secy. Ministry Communication New Delhi and 2 Others