HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW WRIT - A No. - 9773 of 2025 Court No. - 8 HON'BLE MANISH MATHUR, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for petitioner and Mr. S.B. Pandey, learned Deputy Solicitor General of India assisted by Mr. Varun Pandey, learned counsel for opposite parties. 2. Petition has been filed challenging orders dated 18.08.2025 and 20.08.2025 as well as the relieving order dated 23.08.2025 whereby petitioner has been transferred from 091 RAF to 232 (M) BN. 3. It has been submitted that reasons for petitioner's transfer have been indicated in the letter dated 20.08.2025 to the effect that she was due for transfer in the year 2023 but her name was not included in the transfer list and therefore, she is required to be transferred since she has already served for 12 years in Lucknow. 4. Learned counsel has thereafter drawn attention to the order dated 19.02.2024 to indicate that petitioner was in fact included in the earlier transfer list by the transferred from 233 (M) BN to 107 RAF but upon a representation being made, the aforesaid transfer order was cancelled vide order dated 16.04.2024. 5. It is, therefore, submitted that the said order would indicate an amendment and fresh posting vide dated 16.04.2024 due to which petitioner was required to continue in the present place of posting for a period of four years in terms of Clause-8 of the standing order dated 27.09.2022. It is also submitted that petitioner's minor children are studying in local school and such transfer effected in mid session would hamper their studies. He has also Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Kuldeep Pati Tripathi, Vrishank Pathak Counsel for Respondent(s) : A.S.G.I. Priyanka Rajput .....Petitioner(s) Union Of India Ministry Of Home Affairs Govt. Of India Thru. Secy. And 3 Others .....Respondent(s) alluded to Clause-10 of the aforesaid standing order to submit that all transfers are required to be completed by 31st, March of the year of SCT whereas in the present case, present order has been passed subsequently. 6. Learned counsel for opposite parties have refuted submissions advanced by learned counsel for petitioner with the submission that the order dated 20.08.2025 itself indicates that petitioner has already served for a period of 12 years in Lucknow and therefore, was required to be transferred. 7. It is submitted that order indicated by learned counsel for petitioner in the year 2024 in fact was cancelled. It is also submitted that petitioner is currently employed in the Rapid Action Force and any interference with the impugned order would have deleterious effect upon discipline and morale of the forces. 8. Upon consideration of submissions advanced by learned counsel for parties and perusal of material on record, it is evident that petitioner has undisputedly served at Lucknow for a period of 12 years. Her earlier transfer order dated 19.02.2024 has been cancelled upon her representation vide order dated 16.04.2024 retaining her at Lucknow. 9. In such circumstances, it cannot be said that order dated 16.04.2024 provided any fresh transfer of petitioner and therefore, paragraph-8 of the standing order dated 27.09.2022 will be inapplicable. It is on account of the oversight that impugned order has been passed and therefore, also conditions of paragraph-10 of the standing order would be inapplicable. 10. It is relevant aspect that petitioner is posted in the Rapid Action Force, which is a Para Military Force and may entail transfer at a moments notice. The normal grounds for challenging a transfer order are not available to persons of such Para Military Forces who are completely aware of the nature of their employment which may entail transfer to different parts not only of the country but of the world as well. 11. In view thereof, this Court does not find any occasion to grant any indulgence. 12. The petition, therefore, being devoid of merit is dismissed. Parties to bear their own cost. 13. At this stage, learned counsel petitioner submits that petitioner has WRIA No. 9773 of 2025 2 submitted a representation to the authorities concerned dated 20.08.2025, which may be directed to be considered. In case any such representation has been received by the authority concerned, the same may be decided sympathetically. August 27, 2025 Satish WRIA No. 9773 of 2025 3 (Manish Mathur,J.) Digitally signed by :- SATISH KUMAR BHARATI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench