High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Case Law Search
Mohan Lal Verma v. State Of U.P. Thru' Secretary, Kshetriya Vikas Anubhag & Ors - WRIT - A No. 34865 of 2006  RD-AH 11522 (14 July 2006)
Civil Misc.Writ Petition No. 34865 of 2006
Mohan Lal Verma .....Petitioner
State of U.P. & others .....Respondents
Hon'ble S.Rafat Alam, J.
Hon'ble Sudhir Agarwal,J.
By means of this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has come up for quashing the order of the Chairman-cum-Administrator, Ram Ganga Command Project, Kanpur, respondent no. 3, dated 15.6.2006 (Annexure-20 to the writ petition), transferring him from Ram Ganga Command Project, D.P.A.P., Allahabad to Ram Ganga Command Project, Robertsganj, Sonebhadra.
We have heard Sri Ashok Khare, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the State respondents no. 1 & 2, Sri P.S. Baghel, learned counsel appearing for respondent no. 3 and Sri V.C. Mishra, learned counsel appearing for respondent no. 4.
Sri Ashok Khare, learned counsel for the petitioner urged that the Chairman-cum-Administrator, respondent no. 3 has no jurisdiction or authority to transfer the petitioner and it is the Secretary, Kshetriya Vikas Anubhag-I, Government of U.P., Lucknow, respondent no. 1 alone is vested with such power and thus, the order of transfer being without jurisdiction cannot sustain. He also argued that in view of the office memorandum dated 1.12.2005 issued by the Secretary debarring his posting for two years against the sensitive post involving expenditure in construction work the order of transfer ought not to have been passed by respondent no.3.
We have considered the submissions. Admittedly, the petitioner is the employee of Ram Ganga Command Project and is posted at Allahabad for the last six years and therefore, in view of the instructions issued by the Government dated 11.5.2004 he has been transferred to Robertsganj Unit under the Ram Ganga Command Project. The Government Order dated 5.2.1998 on which reliance has been placed to show that respondent no.3 has no authority to transfer him is of no help to the petitioner because by the aforesaid Government Order the amalgamated unit has been given under the control of the Secretary, Kshetriya Vikas Anubhag-I, Government of U.P., Lucknow, (respondent no. 1), but the other conditions remained the same. It has no relevance in the matter of transfer. The contention that the present transfer amounts to modification in the order debarring his posting for two years against important post can also not be accepted because by the above order posting against the post where he has to look after the matters involving construction etc. is debarred, whereas by the impugned order he has been given posting as Soil Conservation Officer. That apart even if the order of transfer is contrary to any executive instructions or orders, this Court normally should not interfere with and the appropriate course for the aggrieved employee is to approach the higher authority of the department, as has been held by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Mrs.Shilpi Bose and others Versus State of Bihar & others reported in AIR 1991 SC 532.
We, therefore, do not find any reason to interfere with the impugned order of transfer in exercise of writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
The writ petition, being devoid of merit, is hereby dismissed without any order as to costs.
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.