HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
JITENDRA PRASAD – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF UTTARAKHAND – Respondent
WPSS 1612 / 2025
Office Notes,
reports, orders or proceedings
SL.
Date or directions COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS
No.
and Registrar’s
order with Signatures
WPSS/ 1612/ 2025
Hon’ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J
1. Mr. Avdit Noliyal, learned counsel
for the petitioner.
2. Mr. N.K. Papnoi, learned Standing
Counsel for the State of Uttarakhand.
3. Petitioner is serving as Group ‘D’ employee in Public Works Department at Dehradun. He was transferred vide order dated 15.09.2025 to District Pauri Garhwal on administrative ground. Thus, feeling aggrieved, petitioner has
approached this Court.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner’s transfer on administrative ground is unsustainable, as there is no complaint or adverse material against him; the adverse material, based on which petitioner was transferred, has also not been indicated
in the transfer order.
5. Per contra, learned State Counsel submits that petitioner is serving at Dehradun continuously ever since the year 2007; there are number of complaints against the petitioner from all quarters and it was also found that petitioner was under influence of liquor during office hour, for which, show cause notice was also issued to him, but he could not give any satisfactory reply to the notice. He submits that Authorities have taken a sympathetic view, in respect of petitioner, by simply transferring him to District Pauri
Garhwal. Any interference with the impugned transfer would lead to indiscipline in the office and things would be difficult for the Administrative Authorities.
6. This Court does not find any reason to interfere with the impugned transfer order. It is not in dispute that petitioner holds a transferable post and his transfer to Pauri Garhwal is as per conditions of service.
7. The writ petition is, however, disposed of with liberty to petitioner to make representation to Engineer-in- Chief. If he makes representation on or before 14.10.2025, Engineer-in-Chief shall take decision on his representation, within two weeks thereafter. It shall be open to the petitioner to submit representation online.
8. For a period of three weeks or till decision in taken on his representation, whichever is earlier, status quo qua petitioner’s posting shall be maintained.
(Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J)
10.10.2025 Aswal NITI RAJ SINGH ASWALDU26sCDe.9TiN a 5r g Fti :4ae 1E Atc l: a2N =Rl 80I u yN A=mK 3 s, 5eio b8ag .fA=cn 3NH r, e =61pDIdG747o ,b5H 2s E y 6taCeBF N l: O 5C I74 T 3 Uo80d R , 8 1A cF=neO - J 29FS 63NB I ' UN 7I0fT TG 68H 1R98 ,A A3 R CsJ4S tB =fS WK 60UI H FN7A T14G LN HAC D R20, S o5EKW ua3H= DA8H L2N5 I 6 GfDF9H,8 C0C2OaU D3R A0T C8 O Fb4 F0 8d6130
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.