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


H.C. (P) 112/24 Cp Chatar Sain v. State Of U.P. And Others - WRIT - A No. 7846 of 2007 [2007] RD-AH 4140 (12 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).


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 Head Constable in the Civil Police. By order dated 30.12.2006 he was transferred from Gautam Budh Nagar to Baghpat. Thereafter the petitioner was relieved from Gautam Budh Nagar and he then joined at Baghpat on 23.1.2007. Immediately after two days i.e. On 25.1.2007 an order has been passed by the Deputy Inspector General of Police, (Establishment) U.P. Police Headquarters, Allahabad, Respondent no.2, transferring the petitioner from Baghpat to Gorakhpur. The submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the said transfer order has been passed within a short interval of less than one month and within two days of the petitioner having joined his duties at the transferred place.

Considering the facts and circumstances of this case, in my view, no useful purpose would be served in calling for a counter affidavit and keeping this writ petition pending. In the circumstances of this case, this writ petition is disposed of with the direction that in case if, with regard to his grievances made in this writ petition, the petitioner files a fresh comprehensive representation before  the Deputy Inspector General of Police, (Establishment) U.P. Police Headquarters, Allahabad, Respondent no.2 within ten days from toda, along with a certified copy of this order, the same shall be considered and decided by the said Respondent no. 2 within three weeks of the filing of the same and whatever orders are passed, the petitioner shall comply with the same within ten days thereafter.

Till the decision on the representation of the petitioner if filed within the aforesaid time granted, the operation of the impugned order dated 25.1.2007 passed by Respondent no.2 and the consequential order dated 4.2.2007 shall remain in abeyance.

With the aforesaid observations/directions, this writ petition is disposed of. No order as to cost.

dt. 12.3.2007


w.p. 7846.07


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.