Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:41145 Court No. - 18 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 7801 of 2025 Petitioner :- Sohini Gautam Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Finance U.P. Lko. And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Hari Krishna Chaubey,Manoj Kumar Mishra,Vinayak Tiwari Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Manish Mathur,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for petitioner and learned State Counsel for opposite parties. 2. Petition has been filed challenging order dated 15th June, 2025 whereby petitioner currently employed as Accountant has been transferred from Lucknow to district Banda. Also under challenge is the order dated 9th April, 2025 rejecting petitioner's representations. 3. It has been submitted that impugned order has been passed ignoring the fact that petitioner had in fact submitted representations against the transfer but the impugned order has erroneously indicated that petitioner never submitted any such representation. It is further submitted that earlier options were called for from all the employees pertaining to their choice of posting but in pursuance thereof, the petitioner was unable to upload her choice due to malfunctioning of the website and subsequently gave her choices which have been completely ignored. It is submitted that opposite parties have also not considered the aspect of paragraph 5(iii) of the government order dated 6th May, 2025 providing for couple posting particularly since petitioner's husband is employed in a non transferable government employment in Lucknow. 4. Mr. Sandeep Sharma Learned State Counsel has refuted submissions advanced by learned counsel for petitioner with submission that petitioner does not have any vested right for continuation of posting in a particular place of her choice. It is further submitted that the government order is merely in the nature of guidelines and does not bind the authorities for complying with the options given by petitioner. It is also submitted that impugned order clearly indicates the fact that petitioner has been posted in district Lucknow for the past more than 20 years and can not be continued interminably in the same place of posting. He has also placed reliance on written instructions dated 15th July, 2025, a copy of which is taken on record as well as the judgments rendered by coordinate benches of this court in the cases of Writ A No. 7371 of 2025, Pradeep Kumar Gautam versus State of U.P. and another and Writ A No. 7292 of 2025, Amit Mishra versus State of U.P. and others two cases. 5. Upon consideration of submissions advanced by learned counsel for parties and perusal of material on record, it is evident and not denied that petitioner has been posted in district Lucknow for more than 20 years. The aspect of couple posting as indicated in paragraph 5(iii) of the government order dated 6th May, 2025 thus provide a policy of couple posting. However in the considered opinion of this Court, such a provision can not be made applicable for the entire length of service of a government employee particularly as in the present case when the petitioner has continued to be posted in district Lucknow for the past 20 years. 6. In view of aforesaid, this Court is not inclined to grant any indulgence with regard to impugned orders. However liberty is granted to petitioner to file a fresh representation before the authorities concerned seeking a transfer in nearby district. In case any such representation is made, the same may be considered and decided in accordance with law. However the same shall not provide any vested right to petitioner to demand any particular posting. With the aforesaid directions, the petition stands disposed of. Order Date :- 18.7.2025 prabhat Digitally signed by :- PRABHAT KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench