Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details


High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation


Dilip Kumar And Another v. State Of U.P. And Others - WRIT - A No. 33643 of 2007 [2007] RD-AH 12901 (26 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).


Court No. 38

Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 33643 of 2007

Dilip Kumar and another


State of U.P. and others

Hon'ble V. K. Shukla, J.

Petitioners have  been performing and discharging duties as Lekhpal. On 23.06.2007, on the premises that petitioners have completed three years of their service at one place, they were transferred. Petitioner No. 1 has been transferred from circle Samogar to Ghatwasan in Tehsil Sadar, whereas petitioner No. 2 has been transferred from circle Devri to Barauli Ahir in Tehsil Sadar. Petitioners submit that they have joined at their transferred place, thereafter, again they have been transferred on the premises that petitioners have completed three years of their service at one place, and this time petitioner No. 1 has been transferred from circle Ghatwasan to Samogar in Tehsil Sadar, whereas petitioner No. 2 has been transferred from circle Barauli Ahir to Devri in Tehsil Sadar. At this juncture present writ petition has been filed.

Learned counsel for petitioners has asserted that on totally wrong premises, petitioners have been sought to be transferred, as such order of transfer is liable to be interfered with by quashing the same.

Learned Standing Counsel, on the other hand, contended that earlier transfer order has been modified,  and such modification in transfer order has been made by competent authority; coupled with the fact that petitioners hold transferable post and can be transferred, and there has been no violation of any Rules or Regulations.

After respective arguments have been advanced, factual position which emerges is to the effect that petitioners were transferred vide order dated 23.06.2007 and thereafter the said order of transfer has been modified vide order dated 17.07.2007. Under Rule 21 of Lekhpal Service Rules, 1958, District Magistrate has authority to pass order of transfer within the entire district and the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, within his sub-division, has got absolute authority to accord placement of lekhpals. In the present case the authority who has passed the order of transfer is full competent to pass such order of transfer and even modify the same. In the present case petitioner has been transferred from one place to another in consonance with Lekhpal Service Rules, 1958.  Since alleged transfer order passed subsequently is modification of the earlier transfer order, as such the same requires no interference.          

Consequently, present writ petition is dismissed.




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


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 |

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