Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 104392 (ALL)

MANOJ KUMAR v. THE CHIEF MANAGER ERD AND 3 OTHERS

WRIA/15259/2025 · 2025-10-09

Manju Rani Chauhan

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - A No. - 15259 of 2025 Court No. - 52 HON'BLE MRS. MANJU RANI CHAUHAN, J. 1. Heard Mr. Rajesh Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Vivek Ratan Agrawal, learned Standing Counsel for the State. 2. The writ petition has been filed with the following prayers:- "I. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of writ of certiorari quashing the impugned order dated 24.09.2025 passed by Disciplinary Authority/General Manager (ERD) Union Bank of India, Human Resources Vertical Employee Relation Division Central Office, Mumbai/respondent no.1 so far revocation of suspension order subject to reporting to Zonal Officer, Varanasi not later than 29.09.2025, for further instructions as regard his place of posting. II. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to permit the petitioner to join duty as Head Cashier-II in Union Bank of India, Civil Lines Branch, Rampur and pay salary month to month." 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he is aggrieved by the transfer order and he would file an appeal against the punishment awarded by order dated 24.09.2025. However, he is ready to join at the transfer place, in case his special allowance is not withheld and after joining at the transfer place, he move a representation before the authorities concerned to consider his grievance. 4. Learned counsel for the respondent, on the basis of instructions, which is passed on to the Court today, submits that it has been clarified that the transfer of the petitioner is purely an administrative decision, it is neither punitive decision nor punishment and the special allowance shall not be withheld. He further submits that after suspension order was revoked, the petitioner has been advised to report to Zonal Office as per the directions of the competent authority. There is no provision restricting the Management to take administrative action of transferring services of a clerical staff upon revocation of suspension. Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Rajesh Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Respondent(s) : Vivek Ratan Agrawal Manoj Kumar .....Petitioner(s) The Chief Manager Erd And 3 Others .....Respondent(s) 5. In view of above, in case the appeal is filed by the petitioner within a period of three weeks from today, challenging the punishment order, before the competent authority, the same shall be decided within a period of three months and in case, a representation is moved after joining at the transfer place, before the authorities concerned, the same shall be decided, in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible. As it has already been clarified that the special allowance shall be paid to the petitioner, no observation is being made on the same. 6. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. October 10, 2025 Rahul. WRIA No. 15259 of 2025 2 (Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.) Digitally signed by :- RAHUL GOSWAMI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad