Hon’ble Sudhir Agarwal, J.—Heard Sri A.N.Rai, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for the respondents and perused the record.

2. In this writ petition, petitioner was transferred vide order dated 11.6.2004 but he was not allowed to join at the transferred place on the ground that there was no vacancy. In this view of the matter, petitioner was not allowed to work from July, 2004 to 29.1.2006. Now, when he claimed salary for the said period, it has been rejected on the ground, since he did not work, therefore, is not entitled for salary.

3. It is contended that petitioner was not allowed to join as there was no vacancy on which he was transferred and there was no fault on his part, yet he has been denied salary, which is patently illegal.

4. It is said that on the one hand, respondents themselves passed an illegal order of transfer on 11.6.2004 without caring whether on the place of transfer, there was vacancy or not in which petitioner could have been transferred and when Officer In-charge at transferred place did not allow petitioner to join on the ground that there was no vacancy, for non functioning of this period, petitioner cannot be blamed or made responsible. A subsequent modified order was passed but not communicated to the petitioner for a long period, again for the fault of respondents and still petitioner is sought to be blamed. In fact, respondent authorities are trying to take advantage of their own wrong and instead of holding officer concerned responsible, who passed a mindless order of transfer of petitioner to place where there was no vacancy, petitioner is being sought to be paralysed by denying him salary for the period he could not function not on account of his own volition but on account of denial of respondents authorities.

5. Per contra, learned Standing Counsel submitted that though initial order of transfer dated 11.6.2004 was not correct since there was no vacancy at Rajkiya Audyogik Prashikshan Sansthan (I.T.I.), Banda where petitioner was transferred and for that purpose, non functioning of petitioner during some period may not be the fault on his part. Another order was issued on 9.7.2004 posting him at Government I.T.I., Mahoba but despite thereof, petitioner did not join at Mahoba and hence for period subsequent thereto, he is responsible and is not entitled for salary.

6. The petitioner, a Senior Assistant, was working in District Employment Office, District Banda. vide order dated 11.6.2004, passed by Director, Directorate of Training and Employment, U.P. Lucknow, he was transferred to Rajkiya Audyogik Prashkshan Sansthan (I.T.I.), Banda, on administrative ground. Pursuant thereto, District Employment Officer, Banda, relieved petitioner on 23.6.2004 and directed him to ensure his joining at State Industrial Training Institute, Banda. Pursuant thereto, petitioner submitted joining before Principal, I.T.I., Banda on 24.6.2004.

7. The Principal, however, declined to accept joining and wrote a letter dated 30.6.2004 stating that there was no vacancy of Senior Assistant at I.T.I., Banda, hence he cannot be allowed to join and in this regard a letter has also been sent to Directorate stating that further action would be taken after receiving instructions from Director.

8. Thereafter, petitioner sent a letter dated 2.7.2004 to the Director, Training and Employment, U.P. Lucknow informing the above situation and sought instructions either to permit his rejoining at District Employment Exchange Office, Banda or to direct Principal, I.T.I. Banda to accept petitioner’s joining subject to further orders. It appears that matter remained pending and nothing was done for almost more than a year whereupon petitioner sent a reminder dated 12.9.2005 to the Director. Still, having no response, he approached this Court in Writ Petition No. 21258 of 2005 with the grievance that neither his joining has been accepted nor he is being paid salary for no fault on his part and this actio