Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 195945 (ALL)

RAJENDRA KUMAR v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. FOOD AND CIVIL SUPPLIES LKO. AND 3 OTHERS

WRIA/9078/2025 · 2025-09-18

Manish Mathur

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW WRIT - A No. - 9078 of 2025 Court No. - 8 HON'BLE MANISH MATHUR, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for petitioner and learned State Counsel for opposite parties. 2. Petition has been filed challenging order dated 25.07.2025 whereby he has been transferred from District Fatehpur, Division Prayagraj to Aligarh Division. 3. It has been submitted that in view of the fact that petitioner was earlier working in an aspirational district, in terms of the Government Order dated 06.05.2025, he was required to provide four options for posting as per his choice but despite such options having been provided by him, the opposite parties have ignored the same. 4. Counter affidavit has been filed by opposite parties and in paragraph-11 thereof, it has been stated that in his earlier posting in District Fatehpur, certain irregularities were committed by petitioner in the procurement Season 2024-25 and therefore, it was not found appropriate to consider petitioner's transfer as per his options. 5. However, from a perusal of the counter affidavit, it does not appear that any inquiry whatsoever was conducted recording a specific finding that any irregularities were committed by petitioner in his earlier place of posting in District Fatehpur. It appears that only allegations thereof have been made against petitioner, which cannot from the basis of any finding Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Rakesh Kumar Chaudhary, Anshumaan, Ayush Chaudhary Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. Rajendra Kumar .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Food And Civil Supplies Lko. And 3 Others .....Respondent(s) for irregularities. 6. In view thereof, the reason indicated in paragraph-11 of the counter affidavit is clearly unsustainable. 7. Considering aforesaid fact, petitioner is granted liberty to make a fresh fresh representation before the opposite party no. 3 i.e. Food Commissioner, U.P., Food and Civil Supplies Department, Lucknow pertaining to his options as provided in Government Order dated 06.05.2025. In case any such options are preferred, the concerned authority shall consider and decide the same expeditiously within a period of four weeks thereafter. In case the provisions of the aforesaid Government Order applicable upon petitioner. The order impugned in the petition will obviously be subject to fresh orders passed by the competent authority. 8. With aforesaid directions, petition stands disposed of. September 18, 2025 Satish WRIA No. 9078 of 2025 2 (Manish Mathur,J.) Digitally signed by :- SATISH KUMAR BHARATI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench