HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW WRIT - A No. - 10571 of 2025 Court No. - 4 HON'BLE ABDUL MOIN, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Ran Vijay Singh, learned Additional Chief Standing Standing counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent no. 2. 2. Learned Standing counsel states that notice on behalf of the respondent no. 3 would also be accepted him. 3. No notice need be issued to the respondents no. 4 & 5 taking into consideration the nature of order proposed to be passed. 4. The petitioner is aggrieved by the transfer order dated 08.08.2025, a copy of which is annexure 8 to the writ petition so far as it pertains to the private respondents no. 4 & 5. 5. Contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that as per the transfer policy, the senior most person should be transferred. 6. Contention is that the petitioner is senior to the respondents no. 4 & 5 yet it is the respondents no. 4 & 5 who have been transferred at the expense of the petitioner who has not been transferred and hence the grievance. 7. Responding, Sri Ran Vijay Singh, learned counsel for the respondent no. 2 on the basis of instructions states that the transfer has been made on the basis of the information available on the Manav Sampada Portal. It is Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Vinay Kumar Singh, Ananya Singh Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Ran Vijay Singh Anshu Singh .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Basic Education Lko. And 4 Others .....Respondent(s) contended that the information of the petitioner is wrongly indicated on the portal and despite opportunity having been granted by the respondents on 30.12.2024 & 28.02.2025 requiring the employees whose information is erroneous on the portal, no efforts were made by the petitioner for seeking a correction thereon and he has only filed an application on 11.07.2025 for correction. 8. Responding learned counsel for the petitioner states that even the information of the private respondents is erroneously filled consequently, it was the duty of the respondents who should have looked into this aspect of the matter prior to issuing the impugned transfer order. 9. Considering the aforesaid, the writ petition is disposed of leaving it open to the petitioner to raise his grievance against the impugned transfer order before the respondent no. 2 who is said to be the Secretary, Basic Shiksha Parishad, Prayagraj within a week from today. In case, a grievance is raised by the petitioner then the respondent no. 2 shall proceed to consider the said grievance as submitted by means of a representation by the petitioner who shall pass a reasoned and speaking order upon the same after associating the private respondents and giving a due opportunity of hearing to the private respondents also and pass a order in this regard within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. September 17, 2025 Pachhere/- WRIA No. 10571 of 2025 2 (Abdul Moin,J.) Digitally signed by :- SATYENDRA SINGH PACHHERE High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench