HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW WRIT - A No. - 10830 of 2025 Court No. - 8 HON'BLE MANISH MATHUR, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for petitioners and learned State Counsel for opposite parties. 2. Petition has been filed challenging orders dated 25th August 2025, 2nd September 2025, and 4th September 2025, whereby petitioners have been attached to Aligarh from district Murdabad. 3. Learned counsel for petitioners submits that impugned order has been passed by the concerned authority of PAC, which does not have any jurisdiction over the post of Constable Drivers, as has already been held by this Court in Writ A No. 6915 of 2025 (Raghvendra Singh and others versus State of U.P. and others) decided vide judgment and order dated 3rd September, 2025. 4. Learned State Counsel has been provided written instructions dated 15th September 2025, copy of which is taken on record and on that basis submits that petitioners have not been transferred but attached in view of pending departmental proceedings. 5. Upon consideration of submissions advanced by learned counsel for parties and perusal of material on record, it is evident that the petitioners are currently employed as Constable Drivers while the impugned order has been passed by the concerned authority of PAC. 6. The aforesaid issue has already been considered and decided by this Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Sheshnath Bhardwaj Advoc Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. Mahipal (Pno-962870039) And Another .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Govt. Of U.P. Lko. And 4 Others .....Respondent(s) court in Writ A No. 6915 of 2025 (Raghvendra Singh and others versus State of U.P. and others) in the following manner:- " 18. In view of the discussions made herein above and upon perusal of the various Rules applicable to the PAC as well as the cadre of Motor Transport Department of Police, it is evident that cadre of Constable Drivers constitutes an entirely separate cadre from that of Constables in the PAC. It is also evident that post of Constable Drivers does not come within purview of the PAC Establishment at all after the advent of the 'Motor Transport Rules 2015'. In such circumstances, it is also evident that Police Establishment Board of the PAC would not have any power or jurisdiction over transfer of Constable Drivers in Motor Transport Department of Police. 19. Once the statutory rules do not include the cadre of Constable Drivers and Head Constables within purview of the PAC, in the considered opinion of this Court, the Director General of Police, cannot by administrative instructions supersede specific statutory rules by conferring powers upon an organization which otherwise does not have any power over the cadre of Motor Transport Department of Police. The order dated 22.3.2024 issued by the office of Director General of Police, therefore, is held to be contrary to the provisions of the 'Motor Transport Rules 2015'. 20. Since it is quite evident that impugned orders have been passed by the PAC Establishment Board, pertaining to transfers of Constable Drivers, the same are, therefore, held to be without jurisdiction and impugned orders dated 12.6.2025 and 15.6.2025 are hereby quashed by issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari" 7. In the considered opinion of this court, even though the impugned order may be in the nature of an attachment order but the concerned authority of PAC would not have any jurisdiction over the post of Constable Drivers as has been enunciated in the aforesaid judgment. 8. Considering aforesaid facts and circumstances, the impugned orders dated 25th August 2025, 2nd September 2025, and 4th September 2025 are hereby quashed by issuance of writ in the nature of Certiorari. Consequences to follow. 9. Resultantly, the petition succeeds and is allowed. Parties to bear their own costs. September 18, 2025 prabhat WRIA No. 10830 of 2025 2 (Manish Mathur,J.) Digitally signed by :- PRABHAT KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench