Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:6611 Court No. - 6 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 838 of 2025 Petitioner :- Santosh Kumar Mishra Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Panchayat Raj U.P. Lko. And 9 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Vinay Kumar Tripathi,Himanshu Raghave Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Alok Mathur,J. 1. Heard Sri Himanshu Raghav, learned counsel for petitioner as well as learned Standing Counsel for respondents. 2. By means of present writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 09.01.2025 passed by District Panchayat Raj Officer, Balrampur whereby the petitioner has been given cluster Bhagta Ganwariya Laxmanpur, Mahadevbanki, Sahijnwa, Sonpur and Udaipur Gunwariya and also the order of the same date whereby the previous cluster which were held by the petitioner under the name of Sarkhawa has been handed over to one Pramod Kumar Singh. 3. A perusal of the impugned order indicates that it is a written order where there has been a re-division of the cluster between Gram Panchayat Adhikaries. Though the petitioner submits that the said order has been passed on the basis of complaints and at the dictates of certain Minister. He has also annexed a copy of photograph containing a letter from the Minister to the District Magistrate, Balrampur recommending the name of the petitioner should be transferred out of the cluster of Nand Nagar etc. 4. It has further been submitted that as per Government Order dated 13.05.2022 that the cluster would be changed after a period of three years and consequently the petitioner submits that lastly his cluster was changed in January, 2024 and merely after expiry of one year his cluster has again been changed. 5. Learned Standing Counsel on the basis of instructions received from the District Panchayat Raj Officer, Balrampur has informed this Court that various complaints have been received from the Gram Pradhan with regard to working of the petitioner and therefore in the interest of administration the petitioner has been transferred and given another cluster. 6. I have heard learned counsel for parties and perused the record. 7. It is noticed that the petitioner is working on the post of Gram Panchayat Adhikar and various gram panchayats are looked after by the Gram Panchayt Adhikaries. The grievance of the petitioner is that he has been removed from the cluster of Sarkahwa and has been given a cluster of Sahjena. These are mere administrative orders and the petitioner is in the capacity of Gram Panchay Adhikari is liable to serve in whatever cluster being allotted to and he does not have any right to have been allotted any particular cluster. 8. Apart from above, this Court finds that these are in exigency which can be best looked into by the authorities concerned. In the present case, this Court finds that there were certain complaints against the petitioner and even certain representatives have also intimated this aspect to District Magistrate. Considering the fact that no right is vested to the petitioner to be posted in a particular cluster, this Court does not find it is a fit case for interference in exercise powers and exercise extraordinary jurisdiction vested under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to interfere with such orders which doe not actually tantamount to transfer order but mere allocation of work. The allocation of work is clearly within the administrative domain of the competent authority and he should pass orders with regard to the same in accordance with the exigency of work and administration. Undoubtedly, this Court exercises judicial restrain whenever issues pertaining to allocation of work are dropped before this Court but even such exercise has to be done in public interest and not as per whims and fancies of particular matter. In a particular case, this Court finds that there were sufficient reasons for the authorities to have passed the order changing the cluster of the petitioner and accordingly on such scrutiny this Court would not go into the aspect which has been raised by the petitioner in the present case. 9. For the reasons aforesaid, this Court declines to exercise extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of Constitution of India, accordingly the writ petition is dismissed. 10. The petitioner would be at liberty to join at the cluster which he has been posted forthwith. (Alok Mathur, J.) Order Date :- 30.1.2025/Ravi/ Digitally signed by :- RAVI SHANKAR SRIVASTAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench