Jagesh Kumar v. State of U.P. and 5 Others

Court No. - 33 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 17744 of 2023 Petitioner :- Jagesh Kumar Respondent :- State of U.P. and others Counsel for Petitioner :- Pranesh Kumar Mishra Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C., Abhishek Srivastava,Shivam Yadav Hon'ble J.J. Munir,J. Heard Mr. Pranesh Kumar Mishra, learned Counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Abhishek Yadav, learned Counsel for respondent Nos. 2 and 3, and Mr. Shivam Yadav, learned Counsel for respondent Nos. 4 and 5.

¶2In compliance with the earlier order dated 19.10.2023 and subsequent order dated 20.11.2019, Mr. Abhishek Srivastava, Advocate has produced before this Court instructions from the Chief Engineer (Hydel), Uttar Pradesh Power Corporation Limited, Lucknow, signed by himself.

¶3This petition has been filed, seeking issue of a mandamus, directing the Managing Director, Uttar Pradesh Power Corporation Limited, Lucknow and the Chief Engineer (Hydel) Uttar Pradesh Power Corporation Limited, Lucknow to consider the case of the petitioner's for a transfer from his present place of posting id est Electricity Test Division, District Bareilly to the Electricity Distribution Division, Garhmukteshwar, Hapur, because of his ailing mother, who needs him by her side.

¶4This Court vide order dated 19.10.2023 asked Mr. Abhishek Srivastava to take instructions. The instructions that Mr. Srivastava has received from the Chief Engineer (Hydel), Uttar Pradesh Power Corporation Limited, Lucknow show that in cases where the husband and wife are both employees in government service or corporation service, there is a policy about posting them in the same district or city, as far as possible, but not in any other case.

¶5The decision where an employee is to be posted or where a posted employee would be transferred is a matter within the domain of the employer's primary decision making. There is no scope for this Court to interfere with an order of transfer or a matter where an employee wants a particular posting, unless there be a case about a transfer from the existing posting to another made contrary to statutory rules, or the result of a patently mala fide action, which can be demonstrated. There is no case of this kind obtaining here.

¶6In the circumstances, no case for interference with the impugned order is made out.

¶7In the result, this writ petition fails and shall stand dismissed.

¶8There shall be no order as to costs. Order Date :- 29.11.2023 I. Batabyal (J.J. Munir, J.) High Court of Judicature at Allahabad