Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:142379 Court No. - 52 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 11901 of 2025 Petitioner :- Puneet Kumar Dutt Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 5 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Awadhesh Kumar Sharma,Kamal Kishor Mishra Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Udit Chandra Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J. Heard Mr. Kamal Kishor Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Udit Chandra, learned counsel for respondent nos.4 & 5 and learned Standing Counsel for the State. The writ petition has been filed with the following prayer:- "(a) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent no.3/Sub Divisional Magistrate Chhata/Electoral Registration Officer, Tehsil Chhata, District- Mathura to ensure the joining of respondent no.6/Smt. Seema Singh as B.L.O. in pursuance of the recommendation made by respondent no.4/Khand Shiksha Adhikari (ABSA) Chaumuhan, Tehsil Chhata, District-Mathura vide its order dated 24.05.2025." Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner who was working as an Assistant Teacher in Uchh Prathmik Vidyalaya, Tehsil-Chaumuhan, District-Mathura was engaged as Booth Level Officer (B.L.O.) in Tehsil Chhata by order dated 15.05.2025 issued by the Sub Divisional Magistrate/respondent no.3. The petitioner moved an application before respondent no.3 on 22.05.2025 requesting to relieve him from the duty of Booth Level Officer as his mother is ill and he is the only person to take care of her. On the aforesaid application, no order has been passed as yet. However, another application was given before respondent no.4, on which considering the difficulty of the petitioner one Seema Singh who has been impleaded as respondent no.6 was deputed in place of the petitioner. No orders have been passed by respondent no.3 despite the fact that the respondent no.4 has deputed the respondent no.6 in his place. Therefore, a direction may be issued to respondent no.3 to look into grievance of the petitioner. Learned Standing Counsel as well as learned counsel for respondent nos.4 & 5, Mr. Udit Chandra, submit that the prayer of the petitioner is misconceived as he has come for implementation of the order passed by respondent no.4, who is only suggested that respondent no.6 may be deputed in place of the petitioner as B.L.O. There is nothing on record to show that the aforesaid fact has been communicated to the respondent no.3. No direction can be issued to respondent no.3 for implementation of the suggestion of respondent no.4 by order dated 24.05.2025 deputing respondent no.6 forcing her to join to work as B.L.O. in place of petitioner. In view of the aforesaid, the prayer as made by learned counsel for the petitioner is misconceived and the petition is dismissed accordingly. Order Date :- 20.8.2025 Rahul. Digitally signed by :- RAHUL GOSWAMI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad