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


Putti Lal Sen v. State Of U.P. And Others - WRIT - A No. 63128 of 2006 [2006] RD-AH 19609 (20 November 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).


Court No. 38

Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 63128 of 2006

Putti Lal Sen


State of U.P. and others

Hon'ble V.K. Shukla,J.

Petitioner was transferred from Meerut to Allahabad. Petitioner preferred Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 46367 of 2006 before this Court and this Court asked the authority concerned to consider the matter and interim protection was also accorded to the petitioner. Thereafter authorities concerned in their wisdom considered the matter and have rejected the representation of the petitioner.

The ground for rejecting the representation of the petitioner is that petitioner was posted at Meerut since last more than nine years which is not at all appropriate in administrative exigency as such petitioner on administrative exigency after his tenure has come to an end has been transferred. Keeping all these aspect of the matter representation has been rejected.

It is well settled that transfer and posting are within the domain of the authority concerned and  it is for the authority to see as to to where an incumbent should be posted and where his services can be best utilized. Once petitioner has completed his tenure at one particular place and on administrative exigency authorities have taken decision to transfer the petitioner then no shortcoming can be pointed in the said transfer order. It is true that son of the petitioner is suffering from polio but that does not give right to petitioner to claim his continuance at one place. Once authorities in their wisdom have chosen to transfer the petitioner on administrative exigency the said decision which has been taken cannot be said to be incorrect decision, as such writ petition lacks substance and is dismissed.




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.