Mohd.Asif vs State Of U.P.Through Principal … on 28 July, 2010

Allahabad High Court
Mohd.Asif vs State Of U.P.Through Principal … on 28 July, 2010
Court No. - 6

Case :- SERVICE SINGLE No. - 5155 of 2010

Petitioner :- Mohd.Asif
Respondent :- State Of U.P.Through Principal Secy.Lok Nirman
Vibhag Lko.
Petitioner Counsel :- A.M.Tripathi
Respondent Counsel :- C.S.C.

Hon'ble Shabihul Hasnain,J.

Heard Sri A.M.Tripathi, learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned Standing counsel.

The petitioner has filed this writ petition against his transfer from
Faizabad to Auraiya vide order dated 22.6.2010. He has stated in
para seven that his son who is studying in class X has received
bullet injury in the eye which has not been successfully extracted
from the scalp. This is matter of child’s vision and the operation in
this case is equally dangerous as its treatment. In such a surgery
there is a chance of injury to the nervous systems also. Family
members have tried to get this child treated in Faizabad then at
Lucknow and they have even approached the best hospital
regarding Ophthalmology i.e.Sankara Nethrayala, Chennai. The
prescriptions of Faizabad, Lucknow and Chennai have been
annexed as documentary evidence with the writ petition. Sri
Tripathi has stated that this fact is in the knowledge of the opposite
parties that the petitioner’s family has been shattered because of
this unfortunate incident and while the son is some how coping
with the pressure of final year of High Schools, disturbance at this
juncture will totally ruin the family. Sri Tripathi has further argued
that the transfer order has not been passed on administrative
ground. There is no adverse material against the petitioner. Sri
Tripathi also says that the transfer has been made in violation of
the “Transfer Policy 2010”. Since there is no adverse material
against the petitioner, in the present family condition the petitioner
should not have been put to such a difficult situation.

Normally, this Court does not interfere in the matters of transfer
but in the present case, there is absolutely no reason as to why the
petitioner should necessarily be transferred in this particular year.
His son is in a very difficult medical situation and also he is
studying in Class-X and the examinations will be held in April,
2011. Petitioner’s request is solely on the ground of his son’s
illness, his carrier and examination of High School.
Learned Standing counsel prays for and is granted four weeks for
filing counter affidavit. Rejoinder affidavit my be filed within a
week thereafter.

List immediately thereafter.

Meanwhile the orders dated 22.6.2010 and 24.6.2010, as contained
in Annexure-1 and 2 respectively relating to the transfer of the
petitioner from Faizabad to Auraiya, shall remain stayed till May,
2011. It is made clear that after the said date the opposite parties
shall be at liberty to pass appropriate orders if need be.

Order Date :- 28.7.2010

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

* Copy This Password *

* Type Or Paste Password Here *

Cookies help us deliver our services. By using our services, you agree to our use of cookies. More Information