Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

ROSHAN PRASAD versus STATE OF U.P. THRU' SECRETARY & OTHERS

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Roshan Prasad v. State Of U.P. Thru' Secretary & Others - WRIT - A No. 10433 of 2007 [2007] RD-AH 3589 (1 March 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 Vineet Saran, J.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Standing counsel appearing for the respondents. With consent of the learned counsel for the parties, this writ petition is being disposed of at this stage without calling for a counter affidavit.

The petitioner is a Senior clerk. He is aggrieved by an order dated 12.1.2007 passed by Cane Commissioner, U.P., Lucknow, Respondent no.2, whereby the petitioner has been transferred from district Deoria to district Faizabad. It is the case of the petitioner that he has been elected as President of a registered Trade Union on 18.12.2006. He claims that in terms of the  Government Order dated 9.9.1983 (Annexure-2 to the writ petition) the elected office bearers of a registered Trade Union should not be transferred within two years of their assuming charge of office. The further submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that because there is an enquiry agaisnt the petitioner going on at district Deoria, hence also he should not be transferred.

In the facts and circumstances of this case, in my view, no useful purpose would be served by calling for a counter affidavit and keeping this writ petition pending. Considering the facts and circumstances of this case as well as the aforesaid submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner, this writ petition is finally disposed of with the direction that in case if, with regard to his grievances made in this writ petition, the petitioner files a comprehensive representation before the Cane Commisisoner, U.P., Lucknow, Respondent no.2,  along with a certified copy of this order within ten days from today, for re-considering his decision of transfer of the petitioner in the light of the Government Order dated 9.9.1983, the said Respondent no.2 shall pass appropriate reasoned and speaking order on the representation of the petitioner, in accordance with law, within two weeks of the filing of the same. It is further provided that till decision on the representation of the petitioner by the Cane Commissioner, U.P. Lucknow, Respondent no.2, the impugned order dated 12.1.2007 shall remain in abeyance.

This writ petition is accordingly disposed of. No order as to cost.

The office is directed to issue a certified copy of this order to the learned counsel for the petitioner within 24 hours on payment of usual charges.

dt. 1.3.2007

dps

w.p. 10433.07


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.