Allahabad High Court
/13811/2025 of MOHD. RASHID Vs STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. MEDICAL AND HEALTH SERVICES LKO. AND ANOTHER on 9 December 2025
JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW WRIT - A No. - 13811 of 2025 Court No. - 7 HON'BLE MANISH MATHUR, J. 1. Heard Ms. Savita Jain, learned counsel for petitioner and learned State Counsel appearing on behalf of the opposite parties. 2. Present petition under Article 226 of Constitution of India has
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
LUCKNOW
WRIT - A No. - 13811 of 2025
Court No. - 7
HON'BLE MANISH MATHUR, 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 Ms. Savita Jain, learned counsel for petitioner and learned State Counsel appearing on behalf of the opposite parties.
2. Present petition under Article 226 of Constitution of India has been filed challenging order dated 07.11.2025 whereby petitioner's representation for being posted either at Basti, Gonda or Lucknow on a Class III post has been rejected. Prayer has also been made for a direction to opposite parties to consider petitioner's grievance for transfer to aforesaid places in terms of Clause IV (iii) of Government Order dated 06.05.2025.
3. It has been submitted that earlier as well, petitioner had filed Writ - A No. - 10608 of 2025 which was disposed of vide judgment and order dated 12.09.2025 directing authority concerned to consider petitioner's grievance. It is in pursuance thereof that impugned order has been passed.
4. It has been submitted that petitioner is seeking such transfer in view of fact that he is suffering from multiple illnesses and also due to problematic family conditions. It is submitted that a number of such posts are available in District Lucknow where petitioner can be adjusted.
5. Mr. Sudhir Kumar Singh, learned State Counsel has been Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Savita Jain Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. Mohd. Rashid .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Medical And Health Services Lko. And Another .....Respondent(s)
provided written instructions dated 08.12.2025, which are taken on record and as per which petitioner had been posted earlier in District Gonda for 22 years whereafter he has been posted in District Etah since year 2021. It is submitted that although five posts of Senior Assistants are vacant in Lucknow but the ratio of vacancies in District Etah is higher due to which petitioner is required to be continued in the said District. It is also submitted that none of the illnesses referred to by petitioner in the representation are of such a serious nature which would require his posting only at Lucknow.
6. Upon consideration of submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and perusal of material on record, it is evident that petitioner's home District is Basti and prior to posting in District Etah in year 2021, he had been posted in District Gonda for 22 years. Although instructions clearly indicate five posts of Senior Assistants being vacant in district Lucknow but since petitioner does not seem to be ailing with any substantial ailment, choice posting may not be required in terms of Clause IV of said Government Order.
7. However, liberty is granted to petitioner to make a fresh representation before authority concerned in the next annual transfers requiring such choice posting, which may be considered by authorities concerned.
8. With aforesaid direction(s), the petition stands finally disposed of.
December 9, 2025 kvg/- WRIA No. 13811 of 2025 2 (Manish Mathur,J.) Digitally signed by :- GIREESAN KV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Digitally signed by :- GIREESAN KV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench