HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW WRIT - A No. - 13459 of 2025 Court No. - 7 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 15.10.2025 whereby representation of petitioner for transfer in terms of paragraph 5(v) of Government Order dated 06.05.2025 has been rejected. 3. It is submitted that in view of fact that petitioner is due to superannuate in less than two years, he had filed WRIT - A No. - 7723 of 2025 seeking such a benefit. The said petition was disposed of vide order dated 17.07.2025 directing Chairman, Board of Revenue U.P., Lucknow to pass appropriate orders. 4. Subsequently, it was learnt that the matter has been referred to State Government where it was pending adjudication and therefore he filed WRIT - A No. - 10826 of 2025, which was also disposed of vide order dated 16.09.2025 directing the State Government to take a decision whereafter the impugned order has been passed. 5. It has been submitted that while passing the impugned order, no reason whatsoever has been recorded for rejecting petitioner's application and that the order in fact is cryptic in nature. 6. Learned State Counsel has not been provided any written Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Arvind Pratap Singh Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. Chandra Mohan .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Revenue Deptt. U.P. Lko. And 2 Others .....Respondent(s) instruction but submits that it was rejected on account of fact that the representation was submitted beyond time. 7. Upon consideration of submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and perusal of material on record, it is evident that neither in order dated 17.07.2025 nor in subsequent order dated 16.09.2025 has any time frame been indicated for petitioner to submit a representation. The time-frame in fact was issued for authorities concerned for deciding petitioner's representation. 8. Even otherwise, a bare perusal of impugned order will make it evident that representation has been rejected only on ground that it was not found feasible to grant the same. Absolutely, no reason whatsoever has been recorded for rejecting petitioner's representation. The order therefore is clearly cryptic in nature. 9. In view of aforesaid facts and circumstances where it is evident that opposite parties were required to apply their mind and pass a reasoned order and aforesaid not being complied with, the order impugned dated 15.10.2025 is hereby quashed by issuance of a writ in nature of Certiorari. Opposite party no.1 i.e. Additional Chief Secretary - Revenue Department U.P., Civil Secretariat, Lucknow is directed to reconsider the representation of petitioner and to pass appropriate reasoned and speaking order. Such an order shall be passed by authority concerned within a period of two weeks from receipt of a certified copy of this order. Petitioner shall annex a copy of the representation which he had submitted earlier in pursuance of directions passed by this Court, along with a certified copy of this order. 10. Resultantly, the petition succeeds and is allowed at the admission stage itself. The parties to bear their own costs. November 26, 2025 kvg/- WRIA No. 13459 of 2025 2 (Manish Mathur,J.) Digitally signed by :- GIREESAN KV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench