DHARMENDRA KUMAR YADAV v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. FOOD AND CIVIL SUPPLIES LKO. AND 3 OTHERS
WRIA/9741/2025 · 2025-08-28
Manish Mathur
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 160676 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 160676 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW WRIT - A No. - 9741 of 2025 Court No. - 8 HON'BLE MANISH MATHUR, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for petitioner and learned State Counsel appearing on behalf of the opposite parties.
2. Present petition under Article 226 of Constitution of India has been filed challenging order dated 25.07.2025 whereby petitioner has been transferred from Ballia, Azamgarh Division to Meerut.
3. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that aforesaid transfer order is clearly in violation of clause 4(iv) of Government Order dated 06.05.2025 whereby such persons as the petitioner who were earlier posted in an aspirational district and has completed the requisite number of years, were required to submit their options for the next posting, which was also required to be considered by authorities but in the present case, such options have not been considered.
4. Learned State Counsel has been provided written instructions dated 25.08.2025, a copy of which is taken on record and as per which petitioner's options have been rejected in view of allegations levelled against him with regard to certain misconduct for which an enquiry was also instituted against him and upon submission of enquiry report, re-enquiry has been directed.
5. From the written instructions, it is therefore evident that earlier inquiry was instituted against petitioner in the year 2018 but no final orders have been passed in the said inquiry.
6. In such circumstances, in view of aforesaid government order, it was incumbent upon opposite parties to have considered options provided by petitioner. Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Rakesh Kumar Chaudhary, Anshumaan, Ayush Chaudhary, Shashank Bhushan Singh Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. Dharmendra Kumar Yadav .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Food And Civil Supplies Lko. And 3 Others .....Respondent(s)
7. Considering aforesaid facts and circumstances, opposite party no.3 i.e. Food Commissioner U.P., Food and Civil Supplies Department U.P. is directed to reconsider petitioner's options with regard to his posting in light of observations made herein above expeditiously within a period of ten days from the date a certified copy of this order is served upon the said authority within one week from today.
8. Till disposal of petitioner's representation, he shall not be compelled to join at the transferred place. August 28, 2025 Shahnaz WRIA No. 9741 of 2025 2 (Manish Mathur,J.) Digitally signed by :- SHAHNAZ BANO High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench