Pno No. 060490373 Ved Prakash vs State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 952 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
 
 

?Court No. - 1
 

 
Case :- SPECIAL APPEAL No. - 9 of 2023
 

 
Appellant :- Pno No. 060490373 Ved Prakash
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Home, Govt. U.P. Civil Sectt. Lko. And Others
 
Counsel for Appellant :- Santosh Kr. Yadav Warsi,Rati Yadav
 
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
 

 
Hon'ble Ramesh Sinha,J.

Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.

The instant intra Court appeal has been filed by the appellant, Ved Prakash, challenging the order dated 15.12.2022 passed by the learned Single Judge in Writ-A No. 7604 of 2022 : Pno No. 060490373 Ved Prakash Vs. State of U.P. and others, rejecting the interim relief filed in the said writ petition.

Heard Shri Santosh Kumar Yadav 'Warsi', learned Counsel for the appellant, Shri Anil Kumar Singh Visen, learned Standing Counsel for the State/respondents and perused the impugned judgment as well as material brought on record.

The appellant, who is said to be working as Constable (Driver) under the U.P. Police Motor Transport Unit Subordinate Officers Service Rules, 2015 and has been transferred to Second Battalion P.A.C., Sitapur by the order of Commandant, 26th Battalion P.A.C., Gorakhpur dated 08.11.2022 issued in pursuance of the order of Inspector General of Police, Madhya Zone, Lucknow dated 05.11.2022, has filed the aforesaid writ petition against the orders dated 08.11.2022 and 05.11.2022, asserting that as per Rules, 2015, the appointing authority of the original writ petitioner/appellant is the Superintendent of Police, hence the transfer orders, impugned in the writ petition, is contrary to Rules, 2015.

The learned Single Judge, after appreciating the facts that in compliance of the order of transfer impugned in the said writ petition, the writ petitioner has joined at the transferred place of posting and is working at the transferred place and the matter can be decided finally only after exchange of affidavits, rejected the interim relief application so vehemently pressed by the learned Counsel for the appellant/writ petitioner while directing the parties to exchange pleadings and fixed the case in the third week of February, 2023 by means of the order dated 15.12.2022, which is impugned the instant special appeal.

On due consideration, we do not find any illegality or infirmity in the impugned order rejecting the interim relief application.

The special appeal is, accordingly, dismissed.

.

(Subhash Vidyarthi, J.) (Ramesh Sinha,J.)

Order Date :- 10.1.2023

Ajit/-