Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

AMAR SINGH AND OTHERS versus STATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Amar Singh And Others v. State Of U.P. And Others - WRIT - A No. 54927 of 2006 [2006] RD-AH 17123 (4 October 2006)

 

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

Court No. 38

Civil Misc. Writ Petition No.45927 of 2006

Amar Singh and others

Versus

State of U.P. and others

Hon'ble V. K. Shukla, J.

Petitioner No. 1 is Head Constable and petitioner Nos. 2 to 5 are Constables, working in the district of Etah since year 2002. Petitioner Nos. 1 to 5 were transferred from Etah to Agra on 20.06.2004, and Petitioner No.6 was transferred to Firozabad on the same day. Petitioners requested for stay of their transfer and the Senior Superintendent of Police Etah, recommended and the said transfer orders were stayed up to month of May, 2005 and thereafter again in the month of May, 2005, it was further stayed for another period of six months. On 18.09.2006, Petitioners have been relieved by way of radiogram and asked to join at transferred place. At this juncture present writ petition has been filed.

Learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri  Kripa Shankar Singh, contended with vehemence that  various personal inconvenience would be caused to the petitioners on account of attachment orders being  cancelled and on account of relieving order, as such impugned order of transfer as well as oder of relieving is liable to be quashed.

Learned Standing Counsel, on the other hand contended that petitioners are members of disciplined force and enough accommodation has been accorded to them, as such no interference be made.

After the respective arguments have been advanced, the undisputed position which emerges is to the effect that petitioners are members of disciplined force, and they were transferred way back in June, 2004 and looking to their personal inconvenience, Petitioners were permitted to stay at  Etah, but they have got no vested right to stay at one particular place. Transfer and posting is within the domain of the authority concerned, and it is not for this Court to see as to where an incumbent should be posted and were his services can be best utilized. In the present case, once the authorities in their wisdom have chosen to cancel the attachment order, there is no irregularity or infirmity in the same. Transfer order can be interfered with only in two contingencies; (i) when transfer has been made in violation of  Statutory Rules; and the (ii) when power of transfer has been exercised mala fidely. Here, in the present case none of the two contingencies are in existence. Writ petition lacks substance and the same is dismissed.

04.10.2006

SRY


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.