HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - A No. - 15177 of 2025 Court No. - 34 HON'BLE VIKAS BUDHWAR, J. 1. Heard Sri Ramesh Chandra Agrahari, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Prem Shanker Mishra, learned Standing Counsel, who appears for State-respondents. 2. The case of the writ petitioner is that he was appointed as Sub-Inspector Civil Police in the year 2018 under dying in harness rules by virtue of the transfer order dated 11.07.2025, the writ petitioner who has been posted in Civil Police, District Chitrakoot has been transferred to GRP, Headquarter, Lucknow. 3. Questioning the transfer order, the writ petitioner preferred Writ-A No. 9920 of 2025 which came to be disposed of requiring the respondents to decide the representation and now the representation stands decided by the second respondent, Additional Director General of Police, Karmik/ Establishment, U.P. at Lucknow on 10.09.2025. 4. Questioning the same, the writ petitioner has been filed the present writ petition. 5. Learned counsel for the writ petitioner submits that the transfer order cannot be sustained for the simple reason first of all, the mother of the writ petitioner is ailing and suffering from serious diseases and further the wife of the writ petitioner is doing B.ed and pursuing first year course from Dharamraj Singh College of Education, Ragoli, Chitrakoot and it would jeopardize the entire family situation, in case, the writ petitioner is to be transferred. He submits that till the wife of the writ petitioner completes her course, the writ petitioner may not be transferred. Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Ramesh Chandra Agrahari Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. Chandramani Pandey .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 2 Others .....Respondent(s) 6. Learned Standing Counsel on the other hand submits that whatever might be the writ petitioner has no legal right to resist the transfer, particularly, when there is nothing on record to substantiate that there is infirmity in the transfer order. 7. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the records carefully. 8. The sole question which arises for determination in the present proceedings is to the extent of judicial intervention at this stage. The writ petitioner has not disputed the fact that he holds a transferable post, moreover in transfers inconvenience are already there but this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is not to interfere in such a matter in absence of pointing out of any jurisdictional error. 9. Accordingly, the writ petition stands rejected. October 14, 2025 A. Prajapati WRIA No. 15177 of 2025 2 (Vikas Budhwar,J.) Digitally signed by :- ASHUTOSH KUMAR PRAJAPATI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad