Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:26505 Court No. - 18 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 4052 of 2025 Petitioner :- Chandrawati Verma Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Of Secondary Edu. Lko. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Mayankar Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J. 1.Heard learned counsel for the petitioner(s) and learned Standing Counsel who has accepted notice on behalf of respondents. 2.By means of this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for issuance of a writ of certiorari quashing impugned order dated 27.3.2025, passed by Director, Secondary Education, U.P., Lucknow. A further writ in the nature of mandamus directing respondents to transfer the petitioner from district Bahraich to Abhinav Viyalaya Kansapur, block Jhanjhari, district Gonda. 3.This court has passed the following order on 15.4.2025 : "Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Standing counsel for the respondents. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is currently serving as a Lecturer at Rajkiya Model Inter College, Badgaon Huzurpur, Bahraich. However, she has been substantively posted in Mamraj Rajkiya Balika College, Huzurpur Payagpur, Bahraich, where she has been serving for more than one and a half years. It is further submitted that vide order dated 23.06.2024, the Director of Secondary Education, U.P., issued a policy outlining the guidelines for inter-district transfers of teachers employed in Government Secondary Schools. The said policy is available on record. As the petitioner met all the eligibility criteria stipulated therein, she submitted an online application on 25.06.2024. However, her request was rejected on 27.06.2024 by the District Inspector of Schools, Bahraich, on the ground that the petitioner's husband is posted in District Gonda, which is situated 30 kilometers away. Aggrieved by this rejection, the petitioner preferred Writ Petition No. 7677 of 2024, Chandrawati Verma Vs. State of U.P. and others, wherein a direction was issued to opposite party no. 2 to consider and decide the petitioner?s representation by passing a reasoned and speaking order, after affording an opportunity of hearing to the parties. The said order was required to be passed strictly in accordance with law and the transfer policy. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that although the Court had directed that the matter be decided within two months from the date of submission of the certified copy of the order, which was submitted on 13.09.2024, however, the authority failed to comply with the said direction. The representation of the petitioner was eventually decided only on 27.03.2025, well beyond the prescribed time frame. It is also submitted that the impugned order, annexed as Annexure No. 1, reflects a complete non-application of mind on the part of opposite party no. 2. The order is devoid of any reasoning and does not indicate any independent application of mind. Rather, it merely reproduces the comments of the District Inspector of Schools and rejects the petitioner?s application on the ground that the transfer session has concluded. Further, learned counsel for the petitioner contends that, firstly, the District Inspector of Schools did not have the authority under the policy dated 23.06.2024 to reject the petitioner?s application; his role was limited to forwarding the application to opposite party no. 2 after verifying the parameters set forth in paragraph 4 of the policy. Secondly, the delay in decision-making is attributable to the respondents themselves. The impugned order, thus, suffers from arbitrariness and lack of application of mind. In view of the submission made by learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Standing Counsel is directed to produce the relevant records on the next date of hearing. Put up on 23.04.2025 as fresh." 4.Today, record has been produced by learned standing counsel. Mr. Manoj Kumar Ahirwar, D.I.O.S., Bahraich is also present in person. 5.A perusal of the record shows that the report of District Inspector of Schools has been quoted as it is while passing the impugned order, Annexure No.1 and apparently, no reason has been assigned by the Director Secondary Education while rejecting representation of the petitioner. The order appears to have been passed in purported compliance of judgment and order dated 10.9.2024 passed in Writ A No.7677 of 2024. The order is cryptic and and apparently suffers from total non-application of mind. 6.Learned standing counsel,on being confronted, could not dispute the fact that there is no reason assigned in the order dated 27.3.2025 (supra) by respondent No.2. 7.In view of the above, it is provided that the impugned order, Annexure No.1 being cryptic and suffers from total non-application of mind is set aside. The respondent No.2 Director of Education is directed to pass a fresh order after affording opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, within four weeks from the date of production of a certified copy of this order by the petitioner. 8.This order has been passed in the presence of the parties' counsel and the officer present today. 9.The petition is disposed of accordingly. Order Date :- 6.5.2025 kkb/ Digitally signed by :- KRISHNA KUMAR BARANWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Digitally signed by :- KRISHNA KUMAR BARANWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Digitally signed by :- KRISHNA KUMAR BARANWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench