Satish Kumar Srivastava vs State of U.P. and Others

The present appeal has been filed by the Appellant against the judgment and order dated 18.12.08 passed by the learned Single Judge whereby the transfer order has been challenged. While dismissing the writ petition, the learned Single Judge also imposed a cost of Rs. 10,000/- upon the Appellant.

We have heard Shri Mata Prasad holding brief of Shri Anil Kumar Srivastava, learned Standing Counsel represent Respondents No. 1 to 5 and perused the judgment and order dated 18.12.08 passed by the learned Single Judge giving rise to present appeal, the grounds taken in the memo of appeal and the documents filed along with it. Learned Counsel for the Appellant has confined his argument to the imposition of cost and submitted that the learned Single Judge was not justified in imposing such a huge sum of cost upon the Appellant.

We have perused the impugned order and find that the learned Single Judge has not mentioned any special reason for imposing such a huge cost upon a Class-IV employee. We do not agree with the imposition of such a huge cost which is hereby deleted.

The appeal stands allowed to the extent as indicated above.