High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Case Law Search
Kailash Ram @ Kailash Prasad v. Additional Director And Others - WRIT - A No. 32486 of 2006  RD-AH 12648 (1 August 2006)
Civil Misc. Writ Petition No.32486 of 2006
Kailash Ram @ Kailash Prasad ......Petitioner
Additional Director, Medical Health & Family
Welfare, Azamgarh & others .....Respondents.
Hon'ble S. Rafat Alam, J.
Hon'ble Sudhir Agarwal, J.
We have heard Sri J.K.Chakraborty, learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondents.
In the instant writ petition the petitioner is aggrieved by the order of the Additional Director, Medical Health and Family Welfare, Azamgarh Division, Azamgarh dated 1.6.2006 whereby the earlier order of transfer dated 24.5.2006 has been cancelled pursuant to the order of the Director General (respondent no.4) dated 29.5.2006.
Learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently contended that since on account of earlier order of transfer, the petitioner already submitted his joining to the transferred place and, therefore, the Additional Director (respondent no.1) has no authority to cancel the same.
We do not find any force in the submission for the reason that this controversy is squarely covered by a Full Bench judgment of this Court in the case of Director, Rajya Krishi Utpadan Mandi Parishad, Lucknow and others Versus Natthi Lal, (1995) 2 UPLBEC 1128 wherein it has been held that even if the order of transfer is implemented and the transferred employee pursuant thereto has joined the post, the same can be cancelled, revoked or modified. In para-17 of the judgment the Full Bench held as under:
"We hold that there is no bar or restriction to the modification, revocation or cancellation of an order of transfer even after it has been implemented..."
In the case in hand it appears that on account of certain complaints alleging that the order of transfer was passed for some extraneous consideration, the Director General (respondent no.4) directed the Additional Director (respondent no.1) to cancel the same and consequently respondent no.1 cancelled the order of transfer dated 24.5.2006.
Thus, we do not find any error in the impugned order. The writ petition, being devoid of merit, is dismissed.
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.