Court No. - 22 Case :- SERVICE SINGLE No. - 5379 of 2010 Petitioner :- Shiv Darshan Yadav Respondent :- U.P.Power Corporation Limited Ashok Marg Lucknow And Others Petitioner Counsel :- Ramesh Pandey Respondent Counsel :- Sanchit S.Asthana Hon'ble Satyendra Singh Chauhan,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the UPPCL.
The present petition has been filed against the transfer order dated 16.7.2010.
Submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the aforesaid transfer
order has been passed on political interference as it is stated that one letter has
been written by a local MLA and at the instance of the aforesaid letter, the
petitioner has been transferred. It is also submitted that the transfers for the
present session have been banned by the State Government and further that
the petitioner is having some personal problem in proceeding on transferred
place.
Learned counsel for the opposite parties, on the other hand, has submitted that
the opposite parties have not acted upon the letter of the concerned MLA up
till now and the said letter does not speak of anything regarding the transfer of
the petitioner. The said letter only makes a request for holding an enquiry
against the petitioner. There were reminders from the higher authorities and
looking to the persuasion from the higher level, the petitioner has been
transferred under the Executive Engineer and the transfer order has been
passed on administrative ground. The consequential order, contained in
Annexure No.1 to the writ petition, has been passed by the concerned
Executive Engineer and under him the petitioner has been allocated a
particular place, therefore, no illegality has been committed by the opposite
parties.
I have heard learned counsel for the parties and I am in full agreement with
the learned counsel for the opposite parties that no such prayer has been made
in the letter of the MLA, which has been referred to by the learned counsel for
the petitioner, for transfer of the petitioner. The letter only speaks about
holding of an enquiry. In order to settle the things in a peaceful manner, a
lenient view has been taken and the petitioner has been transferred to
Akbarpur where the vacancy was available under the jurisdiction of the
concerned Executive Engineer. The law has been settled by the Apex Court
in the case of Mohd. Masood Ahmad vs. State of U.P. and others, (2007) 8
SCC 150 that MPs and MLAs are not debarred from making complaint
against the officer against whom there are complaints. The present case is of
the said nature and therefore, claim of the petitioner to be posted at a
particular place forever cannot be entertained. The transfer is an incident of
service and the petitioner cannot claim to be posted at his nearby place. No
ground for interference is made out.
The writ petition is devoid of merit. It is accordingly dismissed.
Order Date :- 3.8.2010
RBS/-