SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2009 Supreme(All) 3490

PANKAJ MITHAL
RISHI PAL SINGH – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF U. P. – Respondent


Advocates:
Counsel :
Vijay Gautam for the Petitioner; Piyush Shukla, S.C. for the Respondents.

JUDGMENT

Hon’ble Pankaj Mithal, J.—Petitioner who is a Sub-Inspector (Special Category) in U.P. Police has challenged the order dated 16.9.2009 passed by the Deputy Inspector General of Police (Establishment), U.P. Police Headquarters, Allahabad transferring him from district Gautam Budh Nagar to Mau in public interest with the approval of Police Establishment Board.

2. On behalf of the petitioner a supplementary affidavit and then a second supplementary affidavit has been filed. Learned Standing Counsel was earlier allowed time to obtain instructions and to file counter affidavit. A counter affidavit as well as a supplementary counter affidavit has been filed by the learned Standing Counsel on behalf of respondents No. 1 to 5 and respondent No. 7 to which even rejoinder affidavit has been filed. The counsel for the parties as such agree for final disposal of the writ petition at the admission stage itself. Accordingly, having heard Sri Vijay Gautam, learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents at length, I proceed to decide the matter finally.

3. Before addressing various points which have been canvassed by the learned counsel for the petiti







































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top