Deepak Sharma vs Union Of India & Ors.

C. Hari Shankar, J.

The petitioner challenges his transfer to Hyderabad. Amongst other contentions, he contends that his son is epileptic and is a student of Class 10.

The petitioner is also placing reliance on the judgment dated 9 August 2024 passed by a Coordinate Bench of this Court in WP (C) 11036/2024^{11.Dhirendra Singh v UOI}, in which, in similar circumstances, the Court had directed the writ petition to be treated as a representation and a reasoned and speaking order taken thereon within a time fixed by the Court with the right reserved to the petitioner to challenge the said decision if it was adverse to him.

Accordingly, we dispose of this writ petition with a direction to the respondents to treat the writ petition as a representation and take a decision thereon within a period of four weeks from today. The decision, as and when taken, would be communicated to the petitioner forthwith. In case the decision is adverse to the petitioner, its implementation would remain in abeyance for a period of one week from its communication, so that the petitioner would have an opportunity to seek legal remedies, if so advised.

Needless to say, the decision would be reasoned and speaking and would deal with all issues raised in the writ petition.

We have not expressed any opinion on the merits of the matter.

The operation of the impugned transfer order would remain subject to the decision to be taken by the respondents as detailed supra.

The petition is allowed to the aforesaid extent.