Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

GHASEETA SINGH versus STATE OF U.P. THRU' SECRETARY EDUCATION AND OTHERS

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Ghaseeta Singh v. State Of U.P. Thru' Secretary Education And Others - WRIT - A No. 31748 of 2007 [2007] RD-AH 12219 (18 July 2007)

 

This is an UNCERTIFIED copy for information/reference. For authentic copy please refer to certified copy only. In case of any mistake, please bring it to the notice of Joint Registrar(Copying).

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ALLAHABAD

Hon'ble Ashok Bhushan, J.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.

By this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for quashing the order dated 20.6.2007, passed by the respondent No. 1 (Annexure- 3 to the writ petition), by which the petitioner was transferred from Government Inter College, Kandela to Government Inter College Gumati, Saharanpur.

Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the transfer order was not given effect to earlier, and now it is being sought to be implemented. He further submits that the petitioner is working in C.T. Grade therefore, he cannot be transferred out side the district.

I have considered the submissions and perused the record.  

It appears that petitioner represented  against the transfer order dated 20.6.2006, praying for cancellation thereof. The petitioner continued and order was not implemented for a long period. The submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that respondents cannot implement the transfer order at present, has no basis. The reasons for  which the transfer order was not implemented, are not on record.  There is no prohibition in implementing the transfer order at present.  The submission of the learned Counsel for the petitioner that petitioner being C.T. grade teacher, cannot be transferred outside the district, is also not acceptable.  The petitioner is working in a Government school. The transfer from one institution to another institution in another district cannot be faulted.  From the materials brought on record, it is clear that the petitioner was earlier appointed at Haridwar,  Saharanpur thereafter transferred to  Muzaffar Nagar and then Saharanpur and now again at Saharanpur. No ground has been made out, warranting any interference by this Court, while exercising the extra-ordinary jurisdiction envisaged under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.    

The writ petition is dismissed.      

Dated:  18.7.2007

L.A./-  31748/07


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.