Shashikant Saroj vs State of U.P. and 6 Others

This court entertained this petition on 17.11.2025 while directing the learned Standing Counsel to obtain instructions and thereafter the matter was fixed for today. Instructions have been supplied by Sri R.S. Umrao, learned Standing Counsel, submits that he is well equipped with the instructions and the instructions are self-sufficient for disposal of the writ petition and he does not propose to file any further affidavit and the petition be decided on the basis of the documents available on record, thus with the consent of the parties, writ petition is being decided at the fresh stage.

¶12

The case of the writ petitioner is that he was joined the police force as Sub-Inspector in the year 2017 and while being posted as Sub-Inspector in Fatehpur by virtue of the order dated 30.05.2025 passed by the third respondent, he was transferred to GRP.

¶13

Questioning the said order, the writ petitioner preferred Writ-A No. 11263 of 2025 which came to be disposed of on 07.08.2025 requiring the authorities to consider the grievance of the writ petitioner, thereafter now the order impugned order has been passed rejecting the claim of the writ petitioner on 09.09.2025 by the second respondent, Additional Director General of Police (Establishment), Lucknow, U.P.

¶14

Assailing the said order, the writ petitioner has been filed the present writ petition.

¶15

WRIA No. 15199 of 2025

¶16

2

¶17

Learned counsel for the writ petitioner has submitted that the order dated 09.09.2025 passed by the second respondent and the order transferring the writ petitioner on 30.05.2025 cannot be sustained for the simple reason that in the wake of the circular dated 20.02.2025 of the respondents themselves there happens to be a condition that the police officials in civil police are not to be transferred to GRP in case there is any departmental proceedings or criminal proceedings pending against them. Submission is that as per the impugned order itself pursuant to an inquiry conducted on the ground of case crime no. 293 of 2016, under Section 379 IPC, vide inquiry report dated 01.02.2022, the writ petitioner was found to be guilty of the charges and thereafter on 14.09.2022, a show cause notice came to be issued to the writ petitioner to which the writ petitioner tendered his reply and in the meantime, the writ petitioner have been transferred from civil police to GRP on 30.05.2025 and the said inquiry proceedings stood culminated into passing of an order on 21.11.2025. Submission is that once the proceedings stood pending and they had not finalized then the writ petitioner ought not to have been transferred.

¶18

Sri R. S. Umrao, learned Standing Counsel on the other hand submits that whatever might be, the second respondent had proceeded to pass the order of transfer to GRP from civil police in absence of the records being put to his table, particularly, when the police officials at Commissionerate, Prayagraj, second respondent was to furnish the information that proceedings were pending against him. However, he submits that now proceedings have culminated into passing of an order so the matter needs to be revisited in light of the intervening events on 21.11.2025.

¶19

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the records carefully.

¶20

Apparently, the writ petitioner came to be transferred on 30.05.2025 from civil police to GRP. The writ petitioner has also joined the post in question on 22.06.2025 pursuant to an order of the Writ Court in the earlier spell of litigation now the impugned orders have been passed rejecting the representation of the writ petitioner.

¶21

Interestingly, the order impugned acknowledges the applicability of the circular dated 20.02.2025 according to which in the wake of the fact that proceedings are pending the official of the civil police cannot be transferred

¶22

WRIA No. 15199 of 2025

¶23

3

¶24

to GRP. Once the position being so and the inquiry stood finalized in November, 2025, thus, the matter needs to be revisited by the authorities.

¶25

Accordingly, the writ petition is being decided in the following manner:

¶26

(a). The impugned order dated 09.09.2025 passed by the respondent no. 2 is set aside.

¶27

(b). The matter stands remitted back to pass fresh order strictly in accordance with law within a period of six weeks from the date of presentation of the certified copy of the order.

¶28

Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed of .

¶29

November 26, 2025 A. Prajapati

¶30

(Vikas Budhwar,J.)

¶31

Digitally signed by :- ASHUTOSH KUMAR PRAJAPATI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Shashikant Saroj v. State of U.P. and 6 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shashikant Saroj v. State of U.P. and 6 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Rajendra Prashad Yadav vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Smt Ruchi vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Indra Pal Singh vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Deepak Kumar Sharma vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Kanchan vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Ashu Verma vs Union of India and 2 Others