Lt. Col. Prashant Yadav vs The Union Of India And Others

[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Uttarakhand High Court

Lt. Col. Prashant Yadav vs The Union Of India And Others on 31 March, 2026

                                                                    2026:UHC:2245-DB


         IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
                    AT NAINITAL
     HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR GUPTA
                            AND
          HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SUBHASH UPADHYAY

                              31ST MARCH, 2026

             WRIT PETITION (S/B) No. 306 OF 2025

Lt. Col. Prashant Yadav.
                                                                        ...Petitioner
                                         Versus

The Union of India and others.
                                                                    ...Respondents
Counsel for the petitioner.          :   Mr. Ketan Joshi and Mr. Hemant Singh
                                         Mahra, learned counsel.

Counsel for the respondent nos. 1,   :   Mr. Saurav Adhikari, learned CGSC for
2 & 5.                                   the Union of India.

Counsel for respondent nos. 3 &      :   Mr. V.K. Kapruwan, learned counsel.
4.


JUDGMENT :

(per Shri Manoj Kumar Gupta, C.J.)

1. The present Writ Petition has been filed, assailing the transfer/ repatriation list dated 15.07.2025 & 01.07.2025, whereby, inter alia, the petitioner has been transferred/ repatriated from the post of Administrative Officer, Sainik School Ghorakhal, Nainital to New Unit 21 Field Ammunition Depot, (21 FD AMN Depot) Khundru, District Anantnag, Jammu & Kashmir. The petitioner has also prayed for a writ of mandamus, restraining the respondents from transferring the petitioner during mid-academic session, and to allow him to complete his full deputation till 17.05.2026. 1

2026:UHC:2245-DB

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner points out that an interim order was passed in favour of the petitioner in the present Writ Petition on 30.07.2025, and, in pursuance thereof, the petitioner has continued at his original place of posting. He very fairly states that the petitioner has, thereby, remained at the same place, and the academic session has come to end, therefore, the reliefs sought in the Writ Petition have virtually been rendered infructuous. He, however, submits that a mid-transfer in Army works adversely in future and, therefore, the respondents might treat his mid-transfer as adverse in future.

3. Shri Saurav Adhikari, learned CGSC appearing on behalf of Union of India states that the impugned order is only an order of transfer of the petitioner, along with several other persons, and there is no question of the same being treated as an adverse material against the petitioner in future.

4. In view of the stand taken by learned counsel for the petitioner and the respondents, we are of the considered opinion that the Writ Petition has become infructuous by efflux of time.

2026:UHC:2245-DB

5. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed, as having become infructuous.

6. All pending applications stand disposed of accordingly.

______________________ MANOJ KUMAR GUPTA, C.J.

___________________ SUBHASH UPADHYAY, J.

Dt: 31st March, 2026 Rahul Digitally signed by RAHUL PRAJAPATI DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF RAHUL UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=aa4fa3bee6691397758b14516ed3e 66e61bf4c848741983ed8c39e4145cf1dab, PRAJAPATI postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=303B55CC3063D34AC45BF8A 192FCAD15C390A1AAD7B39857D2540AE4C 28A4898, cn=RAHUL PRAJAPATI Date: 2026.03.31 16:38:23 +05'30' 3