HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW SPECIAL APPEAL DEFECTIVE No. - 340 of 2025 Court No. - 1 HON'BLE RAJAN ROY, J. HON'BLE MANJIVE SHUKLA, J. (Order on C.M.Application No.Nil of 2025; Application for Condonation of Delay) 1. Objections filed by the respondents on the delay condonation application is taken on record. 2. This is an application seeking condonation of delay in filing the appeal. 3. Heard. 4. The cause shown for the delay in filing the appeal is sufficient. The application is allowed and the delay in filing the appeal is condoned. (Order on Memo of Appeal) 1. Heard. 2. By means of this appeal, the appellant, who was an opposite party before the Writ Court in Writ A No.7067 of 2025 has challenged an interim order dated 03.07.2025 passed therein by means of which the transfer order dated 15.06.2025 has been stayed. 3. An objection was raised by Shri Ram Raj, learned Counsel for the respondents as to the very maintainability of this appeal considering the fact that the challenge was to a time bound interim order. In response, the Versus Counsel for Appellant(s) : Skand Bajpai, Pradeep Kumar Shukla Counsel for Respondent(s) : Ram Raj, C.S.C. Professor Mohammad Zia Beg .....Appellant(s) Professor Syed Fazlur Rahman Kazmi And 3 Others .....Respondent(s) Counsel for the appellant submitted that though it appears to be a time bound interim order it has the affect of granting final relief to the private respondents and unsettling the appellant who had already joined on the transferred place prior to filing of the writ petition, a fact, which was not disclosed to the Writ Court. The private respondents not having disclosed the said material fact before the Writ Court cannot take such an objection nor can he take advantage of his own concealment. In response, Shri Ram Raj, learned Counsel for the respondents submitted that his client was ill and, therefore, may not have been aware about the joining. 4. Having heard learned Counsel for the parties and having perused the records what we find is that a transfer order dated 15.06.2025 was passed by the State Government transferring the appellant herein from the Rajkiya Unani Medical College, Prayagraj to Rajkiya Takmeel-Ut-Tib College and Hospital, Lucknow in place of the private respondent, who in turn was transferred for joining in place of the appellant at Prayagraj. On 18.06.2025, the appellant joined in place of the private respondent as is evident from the documents on record which are the charge taking and joining certificates. This fact for some reason was not disclosed before the Writ Court. The private respondent has offered an explanation, we do not express any opinion in this regard. 5. When we peruse the order of the Writ Court, we find that the only reason given therein for staying the transfer order is that while the private respondent was working as a Reader in the same college, he was appointed as Professor by direct recruitment and was on probation on the said post, therefore, learned Single Judge was of the opinion, though he has not stated so in so many words, that he could not have been transferred. No other reason has been given. Now, we are not aware of any law where a probationer cannot be transferred, at least it has not been mentioned by the learned Writ Court nor could any such law be placed before us by the private respondents represented by Shri Ram Raj, Advocate. Although, the order impugned is an interim order it has the affect of unsettling the appellant who has already joined and granting relief to the private respondents which is akin to final relief. Purely in the facts of this case, we are of the opinion that if we do not entertain the appeal, grave prejudice would be caused to the appellant, we, accordingly, SPLAD No. 340 of 2025 2 entertain the appeal and for the reasons already given hereinabove, we are also of the opinion that the interim order cannot be sustained on the ground on which it has been passed, the same is accordingly, quashed. The appeal is allowed. We, however, make it clear that if there are other grounds available to the private respondents for seeking fresh interim relief before the Writ Court, it is open for the Writ Court to consider the said grounds and the interim relief application. 6. At this stage, Shri Ram Raj, learned Counsel for the respondents submitted that his client is ready to join at Prayagraj, therefore, it may be ordered, accordingly. The private respondent is permitted to join at the transferred place i.e. Prayagraj within 10 days' from today without prejudice to his rights in the pending writ petition. September 8, 2025 -Piyush- SPLAD No. 340 of 2025 3 (Manjive Shukla,J.) (Rajan Roy,J.) Digitally signed by :- PIYUSH YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench