Allahabad High Court
Rajesh Kumar vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. ... on 22 December, 2022
Bench: Manish Kumar
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Court No. - 20
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 8768 of 2022
Petitioner :- Rajesh Kumar
Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Public Work Deptt. Govt. Lko. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Neel Kamal Mishra,Siddhant Mishra
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Manish Kumar,J.
1. The present writ petition has been preferred for quashing of the order dated 19.10.2022 passed by respondent no. 3 i.e. Engineer in Chief (Design & Planning) U.P., PWD, Lucknow by which the representation of the petitioner has been rejected and directed the petitioner to join at the transferred place i.e. at Lucknow from Bareilly.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that earlier also, against the transfer order, the petitioner has approached this Court by filing Writ-A No. 4919 of 2022 stating therein that the wife of petitioner is suffering from serious ailments and as per the G.O. dated 04.09.1981, she was examined by a Medical Board, which vide its recommendation dated 18/20 June, 2022 has recommended stay of the transfer of the petitioner considering the condition of the wife of the petitioner.
3. This Court had disposed of the said writ petition with liberty to the petitioner to move an appropriate representation and directed the respondent no. 3 i.e. the Engineer in Chief (Design and Planning), UP, PWD, Lucknow to consider and decide the same in accordance with law by passing a speaking and reasoned order. It had also been observed therein that till the decision on the representation of the petitioner, no coercive measure shall be taken against the petitioner.
4. In compliance of the judgment and order dated 04.08.2022, a detailed representation was given by the petitioner which has been rejected by the impugned order dated 19.10.2022 stating therein that as per the para no. 5 (iii) of the Transfer Policy of the year 2022-23, no Officer/employee could be retained at the same place for his personal reason and the petitioner has been transferred at a place having better medical facilities than his present place of posting.
5. It is further submitted that the G.O. dated 04.09.1981 is applicable in the case of the petitioner and the matter has to be decided accordingly.
6. It is further submitted that transfer of one Sri Anand Kumar Sharma had been stayed on the recommendation of the Medical Board.
7. The predecessor of the present Engineer-in-Chief has recommended for stay of the transfer of the petitioner to the State Government. The State Government has remanded the matter with an observation that the High Court has directed the respondent no. 3 to take a decision.
8. It is further submitted that the petitioner has specifically pleaded in para no. 42 of the present petition that he may be permitted to continue at Bareily till June, 2023 and thereafter he is ready to join at the transferred place.
9. On the other hand, learned Standing Counsel has submitted that there is no illegality in the order impugned herein passed by the respondent no. 3 and there is no provision in the Transfer Policy for the year 2022-23 for keeping any officer/employee to continue at one place for such a long period.
10. Considering the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and going through the record, the position which emerges out in the present case is that the respondent no. 3 has passed the order impugned dated 19.10.2022 by placing reliance upon the transfer policy for the year 2022-23, completely ignoring the G.O. dated 04.09.1981 and the directions issued by this Court vide its judgment and order dated 04.08.2022 passed in Writ A No. 4919 of 2022.
12. The respondent no. 3 has also ignored the recommendation of the Medical Board which was formed in pursuance of the G.O. dated 04.09.1981. The objective of the G.O. dated 04.09.1981 is to prevent the bogus applications against the transfer order on medical grounds and once there is a recommendation of the Medical Board, the matter has to be decided in the light of the report of the Medical Board as provided in G.O. dated 04.09.1981.
13. In view of the discussion made hereinabove, the writ petition is allowed. The order dated 19.10.2022 passed by the respondent no. 3 is hereby quashed.
14. The petitioner is directed to make afresh representation to the respondent no. 3 within a period of two weeks from today. If any such representation is made within the aforesaid time frame, the respondent no. 3 shall consider and decide the same sympathetically by passing a speaking and reasoned order. It would also be considered in the light of the Government Order dated 04.09.1981 and the recommendation of the Medical Board as well as the fact that the petitioner has requested to stay his transfer order till June, 2023 only.
15. Till the decision on the representation to be preferred by the petitioner under this order, the petitioner shall not be forced to join at the transferred place.
Order Date :- 22.12.2022
Ashish
