Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:11584 Court No. - 6 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 2242 of 2025 Petitioner :- Ramesh Yadav Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Irrigation And Water Resources Deptt. Lko. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Neel Kamal Mishra Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Alok Mathur,J. 1. Shri Avinash Singh, Advocate has filed Vakalatnama on behalf of respondent no. 3 today in Court is taken on record. 2. Heard Shri Upendra Nath Mishra, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Shri Neel Kamal Mishra, learned counsel for petitioner, learned Chief Standing Counsel for the State, Shri Avinash Singh, learned counsel for respondent no. 3 and perused the material available on record. 3. It has been submitted by learned counsel for petitioner that the petitioner is working on the post of Assistant Engineer in Irrigation & Water Resources Department and is posted at Flood Division, Kushinagar (IIIrd Sub Division Tamkuhi). 4. The grievance raised in the present petition is with regard to the impugned order dated 13.02.2025 passed by the Engineer in Chief & Head of Department, Irrigation & Water Resources Department, Lucknow (respondent no. 2) transferring the petitioner from Kushinagar to Lucknow. 5. It has been submitted by learned counsel for petitioner that the petitioner is due for his superannuation on 30.06.2025 and merely three months remaining for the same. Apart from it, the marriage of the daughter of the petitioner is at the final stage/finalization, which according to the petitioner would likely to be performed in Kushinagar. 6. In the aforesaid circumstances, and considering that policy of the transfer sessions 2024-25 also provides clause 5 (v) that as far as a person, who is going to retire within two years of his service, should be posted within the choice of the district as per option given by him. 7. This petition has vehemently opposed by learned Chief Standing Counsel as well as counsel for respondent no. 3 and submits that the petitioner has been posted in Kushinagar for the last 12 years and further respondent no. 3 has been transferred from Lucknow to Kushinagar and he has already joined in place of petitioner at Kushinagar on 18.02.2025. 8. By means of the present petition, the petitioner has challenged impugned transfer order dated 13.02.2025 as well as the transfer order of respondent no. 3 dated 18.03.2025. 9. Considering the aforesaid facts and especially that the respondents till the time of passing of impugned orders and the relevant facts disclosed in the writ petition especially with regard to the proposed marriage of the daughter of the petitioner are facts, which at the first instance, are to be placed before the competent authority to take a decision with regard to the grievance of the petitioner considering the fact that it is the competent authority/controlling authority, who should look into the grievance of the petitioner and in case he finds that the same are genuine and also that some guidelines or government orders support the case of the employees with regard to the contention raised by them, necessary orders can be passed by such competent authority itself. It is for this reason that this Court always hopes and trusts that the authority would act in accordance with law and redress the grievance of their own employees. 10. In the present case, the petitioner is going to retire on 30.06.2025, which is three months away and this Court does not see any reason as to why this fact was not within the knowledge of the respondents despite the fact that the petitioner has been posted for 12 years in Kushinagar in different spells and this aspect should be considered by the competent authority while considering the representation of the petitioner and also duly consider as to why he cannot be adjusted for further three months prior to his superannuation at Kushinagar. Accordingly, respondent no. 2 is directed to consider and decide the representation of the petitioner expeditiously. 11. At this stage, learned counsel for petitioner submits that he may be granted liberty to move a fresh representation before the respondent no. 2 to which learned Chief Standing Counsel does not oppose the same. 12. In light of the above, with the consent of the parties, this petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to move a fresh representation within ten days from today raising his grievances before Engineer in Chief & Head of Department, Irrigation & Water Resources Department, Lucknow (respondent no. 2) and in case such a representation is made, respondent no. 2 shall consider and decide the same expeditiously say, within two weeks thereafter in accordance with law by a reasoned and speaking order and also considering the observations of this Court here-in-above. 13. Till decision is taken on the representation of the petitioner, the respondents shall not take any coercive measure against the petitioner. . (Alok Mathur, J.) Order Date :- 24.2.2025/Virendra Digitally signed by :- VIRENDRA KUMAR GUPTA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench