Sampurna Nand Verma Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue Deptt. Lko. and 4 Others — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Sampurna Nand Verma Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue Deptt. Lko. and 4 Others — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Direction to petitioner to file a representation within one week before opposite party no. 2 (Commissioner, Lucknow Division Lucknow), to be decided in accordance with law within two weeks thereafter; interim assurance that no coercive action shall be taken against the petitioner during the three-week period. Substantive merits of the transfer-policy complaint were not adjudicated.

Issue for consideration

Whether the transfer order dated 14.06.2025 shifting the petitioner from District Lucknow to District Unnao, when he had served only about 2 years and 7 months in a circle contrary to the three-year tenure contemplated by the transfer policy, was impermissible under the transfer policy, punitive in nature, and passed to accommodate another person in District Lucknow.

Court's answer

Without going into the merits of the case, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the petitioner to file a representation within a week before the opposite party no. 2 (Commissioner, Lucknow Division Lucknow), who shall decide the same in accordance with law within two weeks thereafter.

Ratio / Principle

It is made clear that for the aforesaid period of three weeks no coercive action shall be taken against the petitioner.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court, Lucknow Bench (Brij Raj Singh, J.), WRIT - A No. 6890 of 2025, decided 26.6.2025 (Neutral Citation 2025:AHC-LKO:36489): Revenue Inspector Sampurna Nand Verma, posted at Tehsil Mohanlalganj, District Lucknow, challenged his transfer order dated 14.06.2025 to District Unnao (with approval of respondent no. 2 dated 14.06.2025), pleading through certiorari/mandamus prayers that he had served only about 2 years and 7 months in a circle against the minimum three years contemplated by the transfer policy, and that the transfer was punitive and intended to seat another person in District Lucknow. Without entering the merits, the court disposed of the petition by directing the petitioner to file a representation within a week before opposite party no. 2 (Commissioner, Lucknow Division, Lucknow), to be decided in accordance with law within two weeks thereafter, and made it clear that for the intervening three weeks no coercive action would be taken against the petitioner. The substantive question whether the transfer violated the transfer policy or was punitive was expressly left unexamined.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:36489

Court No. - 3

Case :- WRIT - A No. - 6890 of 2025

Petitioner :- Sampurna Nand Verma Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue Deptt. Lko. And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Anand Mani Tripathi Counsel for Respondent :- C .S.C.

Hon'ble Brij Raj Singh,J.

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel.

2. The present petition has been filed with the following main prayers:-

"i. To issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Certiorari thereby quashing the order dated 14.06.2025 passed by the opposite parties as contained in Annexure No.1 to the writ petition.

ii. To issue a, writ, order or direction in the nature of Certiorari thereby quashing the approval given by the respondent no.2 dated 14.06.2025 as mentioned in the transfer order dated 14.06.2025 passed by the opposite parties after summoning the original from the opposite parties so far it relates to the petitioner.

iii. To issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus thereby commanding/directing the opposite parties to allow the petitioner to continue to work and discharge his duties as Revenue Inspector, Tehsil Mohanlalganj, District Lucknow and pay him salary and other allowances each and every month without there being any hindrance in any manner."

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has only been allowed to work in a particular circle about 2 years and 7 months and not permitted to work at least three years as required in view of the transfer policy and has been transferred form one district to another

district which is not permissible under the transfer policy and the same has been passed by way of punishment on administrative ground therefore, the same is not sustainable and liable to be quashed. He further submits that the impugned order of transfer has been passed with the sole intention to adjust some other person in District Lucknow after transferring the petitioner from Lucknow to Unnao.

4. In view of above, without going into the merits of the case, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the petitioner to file a representation within a week from today before the opposite party no. 2 (Commissioner, Lucknow Division Lucknow), who shall decide the same in accordance with law within two weeks thereafter. It is made clear that for the aforesaid period of three weeks no coercive action shall be taken against the petitioner.

[Brij Raj Singh, J.]

Order Date :- 26.6.2025 A nuj S ingh

Digitally signed by :- ANUJ PRATAP SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench