Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:25009 Court No. - 3 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 4692 of 2025 Petitioner :- Manoj Kumar Trivedi @ M.K. Trivedi Respondent :- U.P. State Road Transport Corporation Thru. Managing Director Lko And Another Counsel for Petitioner :- Meenakshi Singh Parihar,Abhiuday Pratap Singh Counsel for Respondent :- Ratnesh Chandra Hon'ble Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J. 1. Heard Ms. Meenakshi Singh Parihar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Ratnesh Chandra, learned counsel for opposite parties. 2. By means of this petition, the petitioner has prayed for following reliefs:- "(i) Issue a writ, direction or order in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned attachment orders dated 17.04.2025 passed by the opposite party No.2, as contained in Annexure Nos. 1 & 2 to this writ petition. (ii) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the opposite parties to permit the petitioners to continue as Assistant Regional Manager (Operations)/ Incharge Regional Manager, Prayagraj till the date of his retirement." 3. Sri Ratnesh Chandra has produced a copy of instructions letter dated 28.04.2025 and the original records. Instructions are kept on record. 4. As per original records as well as instructions letter dated 28.04.2025, it is clear that on account of some complaints against the petitioner and pursuant to the order being passed by the Managing Director, one preliminary inquiry/fact finding inquiry has been initiated but the order of Managing Director having subjective satisfaction to initiate any preliminary inquiry / fact finding inquiry is not available on the record, though Sri Chandra has stated that such letter is also available in another file of the department. 5. On being asked from Sri Chandra if, the petitioner has been attached from Prayagraj area to headquarter Lucknow by means of the impugned orders dated 17.04.2025 for the reason that any inquiry is pending against him, as to why the specific recitals to this effect has not been given in this impugned order dated 17.04.2025 and its modified order dated 17.04.2025 inasmuch as perusal of both the impugned orders reveal that the petitioner has been attached at Lucknow from Prayagraj in interest of the corporation but what is that interest, is not clear. 6. Ms. 6. Ms. Meenakshi Parihar Singh has informed that the petitioner is to retire on 30.06.2025, therefore at the fag end of his retirement, shifting the petitioner from Prayagraj to Lucknow would cause serious prejudice to him, therefore, impugned orders dated 17.04.2025 may be set-aside. She has further submitted that if any preliminary inquiry/ fact finding inquiry is pending consideration, the petitioner may cooperate in such inquiry if his cooperation at all required. The petitioner may be permitted to continue at Prayagraj and may be paid his regular salary. 7. Be that as it may, since the impugned orders dated 17.04.2025 have not been passed as per material shown to the Court from original file or instructions letter and the petitioner has not been apprised the reason that on account of any fact finding/ preliminary inquiry he has been attached at Lucknow from Prayagraj, as there is no recitals to this effect in both the impugned orders so both the impugned orders dated 17.04.2025, passed by Managing Director are hereby set- aside/quashed. However, it is always open for the Managing Director/competent authority to pass any appropriate order strictly in accordance with law, if it is so required. 8.The writ petition is accordingly allowed at the admission stage. Order Date :- 1.5.2025 Reena/- (Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.) Digitally signed by :- REENA KANNAUJIYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench