Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 116660 (ALL)

CONSTABLE CIVIL POLICE PERSONNEL NO 152230209 GAURAV KUMAR v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. ADDL. CHIEF SECY. DEPTT. HOME GOVT. OF U.P. LKO. AND 4 OTHERS

WRIA/367/2025 · 2025-01-15

Alok Mathur

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:2472 Court No. - 6 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 367 of 2025 Petitioner :- Constable Civil Police Personnel No 152230209 Gaurav Kumar Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Home Govt. Of U.P. Lko. And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Sanjay Yadav,Anil Kumar Yadav Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Alok Mathur,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for petitioner as well as learned Standing Counsel for the State. 2. By means of present writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for a writ of mandamus thereby directing the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for transfer from District - Bijnor to District - Meerut on the basis of compassionate (Anukanpa) ground. 3. It has been submitted by learned counsel for petitioner that petitioner's wife health is not well and currently her treatment is going on at Eves Hospital, District - Meerut. The petitioner's wife needs regular checkup for better health but is not able to do so due to petitioner is posted in District - Bijnor and there is no other responsible remembers in petitioner's family. 4. In this regard, it has been submitted that petitioner has given a representation dated 02.04.2024 to the respondent No. 2 / Additional Director General of Police (Establishment), D.G.P. Headquarter, Uttar Pradesh, Lucknow which is pending consideration and has not been decided so far. 5 After arguing the matter at some length, learned counsel for petitioner submits that the grievance of the petitioner shall be substantially redressed in case respondent No. 2 is directed to decide the aforeasaid representation of the petitioner in a time bound manner. 6. Learned Standing Counsel does not object if a direction is issued to respondents for expeditious disposal of the representation preferred by the petitioner. 7. Accordingly, without entering into the merits of the case, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondent No. 2 / Additional Director General of Police (Establishment), D.G.P. Headquarter, Uttar Pradesh, Lucknow to decide the representation of the petitioner dated 02.04.2024 (Annexure No. 3) expeditiously, say, within a period of four months in accordance with law from the date a copy of this order is produced before him and communicate the decision to the petitioner. (Alok Mathur, J.) Order Date :- 15.1.2025 Ravi/ Digitally signed by :- RAVI SHANKAR SRIVASTAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench