Munendra Kumar Verma vs State of U.P. and Others

Amreshwar Pratap Sahi, J.—Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. The petitioner contends that the order of transfer is without jurisdiction, inasmuch as, the District Authority does not have the power to transfer the petitioner within the District.

Learned counsel has relied on an interim order passed in writ petition No. 276 of 2013 dated 29.1.2013.

Sri Ravindra Singh for the respondent points out that the interim order on which reliance is being placed has been passed on an incorrect appreciation of the provisions, namely, Regulations 60 and 61 of the U.P. Co-operative Cane Services Regulations, 1975.

I have perused Regulations 60 and 61. They clearly provide for transfer from one Cane Unit to another outside the district and within the district as well. Regulation 60 clarifies the authority who would be empowered to make such transfers.

The petitioner is admittedly a Clerk. He has been transferred within the district by the District Authority. This will be governed by Sub-regulation (2) of Regulation 61. In the absence of any other regulation to the contrary, the reliance placed on the interim order of the Lucknow Bench is misplaced. The impugned order is perfectly within the jurisdiction of the District Authority. There is no merit in the petition. The writ petition is dismissed.