Allahabad High Court
WRIA/16067/2026 of RAJ KUMAR MAURYA Vs STATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS on 30 September 2026
JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - A No. - 16067 of 2026 Court No. - 33 HON'BLE MANISH KUMAR NIGAM, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for the State and perused the record. 2. The instant writ petition has been filed for the following relief: " a . Issue
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - A No. - 16067 of 2026
Court No. - 33
HON'BLE MANISH KUMAR NIGAM, J.
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for the State and perused the record.
2. The instant writ petition has been filed for the following relief: "a. Issue writ, order, or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for transfer from district Kushi Nagar to Varanasi Zone i.e. Jaunpur, Gazipur or Chandauli on the basis of compassionate (Anukampa) ground of medical emergency of the mother of the petitioner.
b. Issue writ, order, or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent no. 2 to decide the representation of the petitioner dated 19.01.2026 (Annexure No. 2 to this writ petition)."
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is seeking transfer from district Kushi Nagar to Varanasi Zone i.e. Jaunpur, Gazipur or Chandauli, on the ground of medical emergency of the mother of the petitioner. In this regard, the petitioner has moved a representation/application which is pending consideration.
4. Learned Standing Counsel has submitted that no useful purpose would be served in keeping this petition pending and it would be appropriate to direct the respondent no. 2 to decide the representation/application of the petitioner within a time frame as fixed by this Court. Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Chandra Mani Pandey, Prakhar Mishra Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. Raj Kumar Maurya .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 2 Others .....Respondent(s)
5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the present petition stands disposed of finally with a direction to respondent No. 2 to consider and decide the aforementioned representation/application of the petitioner, in accordance with law, expeditiously, preferably within a period of twelve weeks from the date of production of a certified copy of this order after giving opportunity of hearing to the parties concerned provided that there is no other legal impediment. October 1, 2026 Ved Prakash WRIA No. 16067 of 2026 2 (Manish Kumar Nigam,J.) Digitally signed by :- VED PRAKASH SHARMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad