HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - A No. - 15002 of 2025 Court No. - 34 HON'BLE VIKAS BUDHWAR, J. 1. Heard Sri Mirza Faheem Beg, learned counsel for the writ petitioner and Sri Vijay Lal, learned Standing Counsel for the State. 2. The case of the writ petitioner is that he was appointed as a Constable in Civil Police on 01.08.2019 and he was sent on deputation in U.P.P.C.L. Revenue Collection. He was promoted as Head Constable in the year 2018 and in the year 2023, he was further promoted on the post of Sub-Inspector and since then, he was posted at district Lalitpur, however, on 15.06.2025, an order came to be passed whereby the writ petitioner came to be transferred from District Lalitpur to Commissionerate Prayagraj, followed by another order dated 24.06.2025. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the transfer order cannot be sustained for the simple reason that the wife of the petitioner is seriously ill and is suffering from multiple diseases and he has made a representation before the second respondent/Addl. Director General of Police (Establishment), Director General of Police Head Quarter, U.P, Lucknow. 3. Prayer in the present writ petition is for quashing the impugned transfer order. 4. Learned Standing Counsel on the other hand submits that whatever might be, transfer is an incident of service and it might be the case, wherein there are individual problems, which are being faced by the writ petitioner, but the same cannot be a ground to hold the transfer order to be bad. However, it is submitted that it is for the writ petitioner to press his representation. 5. Having heard the submissions so made across the Bar and after perusing Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Mirza Faheem Beg Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. Amit Kumar .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 2 Others .....Respondent(s) the record, this Court is of the opinion that the transfer is an incident of service and the writ petitioner cannot withhold the transfer on the ground of personal inconvenience. In any view of the matter, it is for the writ petitioner to press his representation before the authority concerned. Since the writ petitioner claims to have preferred his representation on 21.06.2025 before Respondent no.2, so the respondent no.2 shall proceed to decide the representation within a period of two months subject to the condition that the writ petitioner joins the transferred place. 6. With the said observation, the writ petition stands disposed of. October 7, 2025 N.S.Rathour WRIA No. 15002 of 2025 2 (Vikas Budhwar,J.) Digitally signed by :- NIPENDRA SINGH RATHOUR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad