HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - A No. - 14265 of 2025 Court No. - 4 HON'BLE AJIT KUMAR, J. 1. Heard Sri Ashok Khare, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Dhananjai Rai, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri P.K. Srivastava, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State respondents. 2. By means of this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution, petitioner has prayed for quashing of order of transfer dated 10.9.2025. 3. The main ground for assailing the order of transfer is that petitioner was earlier promoted vide order dated 21st April, 2025 and given posting at Noida, where she submitted joining on 28th April, 2025 and merely two months had passed that she has been again transferred to another district Mahoba, which is 700 kms away from district Noida. 4. It is further argued by learned Senior Advocate that transfer order is in fact an action punitive in nature for the simple reason that petitioner had earlier made some complaint to Joint Commissioner, State Tax Department on 4th August, 2025 but instead of taking any action upon the complaint, the respondents themselves have proceeded to put the petitioner to harassment by setting into motion a departmental inquiry under the U.P. Government Servant (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1999. The order to this effect has been passed a day after the transfer order was passed on 10th September, 2025. 5. Per contra, it is argued by Sri P.K. Srivastava, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel that transfer order does not contain anything to Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Dhananjai Rai, Vibhu Rai Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. Shikha Singh .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 2 Others .....Respondent(s) term it stigmatic or punitive nature, inasmuch as petitioner working on a transferable post can always be transferred to another station in administrative exigency. It is further submitted that since disciplinary proceeding has been initiated against petitioner, therefore, it also accounted for an administrative exigency to transfer the petitioner to another place so that inquiry does not get unduly influenced at the instance of delinquent employee. 6. Having heard learned counsel for the respective parties and having perused the records, I find that order of transfer to be simplicitor transfer order from Noida to Mahoba. Petitioner was of course, given posting at Noida upon promotion but now she has been transferred to Mahoba seemingly for administrative exigency. An employee working on a transferable post by employer in administrative exigency or public interest even if the order is silent to State specific reasons like public interest or administrative exigency. Thus order of transfer shall always be taken to have been passed in administrative exigency unless and until it is reflected from the language of the transfer order that makes it punitive in nature or to have been passed on some extraneous consideration to term it a result of mala fide action. 7. In the circumstances, I do not find it appropriate to interfere with the transfer order. 8. However, since the petitioner has been transferred at a distance of 700 kms. from district Noida and she has to face inquiry and since the inquiry officer in the matter is Divisional Commissioner Aligarh, petitioner can always move an application for posting at a nearby station of Aligarh or at Aligarh itself, for the purposes of disciplinary proceedings and in the event she makes any such application within two weeks from today, the same shall be disposed of within a further period of four weeks. 9. With the aforesaid observations and directions, this petition stands disposed of. September 23, 2025 Atmesh WRIA No. 14265 of 2025 2 (Ajit Kumar,J.) Digitally signed by :- ATMESH KESARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad