##PAGE1##

2026:UHC:3933

Office Notes,

reports, orders

or proceedings

S NL o.

.

Date or directions COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS

and Registrar’s

order with

Signatures

WPSS 1278/ 2026

Hon’ble Manoj Kum ar Tiw ari, J.

Mr. Navnish Negi, Advocate, for the

petitioner.

Mr. K.N. Joshi, Deputy AG, for the

State.

(2) Petitioner is serving as

Administrative Officer. He was transferred from

the O/o District Education Officer, Pauri to the

O/o Deputy Education Officer, Bahadrabad,

Haridwar, vide order dated 14.6.2024. His

transfer however has been cancelled on

23.4.2026. Thus feeling aggrieved by the

cancellation of his transfer, petitioner has

approached this Court.

(3) Learned State Counsel submits that

petitioner had made a request for mutual

transfer with respondent no. 5 and based on

such request, petitioner was transferred, even

though respondent no. 5 had withdrawn his

consent for mutual transfer before petitioner

was transferred. He submits that factum of

withdrawal of consent by respondent no. 5 was

not brought to the notice of competent

authority and also to the petitioner, as result

the competent authority acted upon the

request for mutual transfer. Learned State

Counsel further submits that once the consent

for mutual transfer was withdrawn by one of

the employees, then such request for transfer

could not be acted upon and this is the reason

the transfer of petitioner, made in 2024, was

cancelled. He further submits that respondent

no. 5 filed Writ Petition (S/S) No. 1091 of

2024, challenging the relieving order passed

against him, in which initially an interim order

was passed, however that writ petition was

ultimately disposed of on 2.1.2026, granting

liberty to respondent no. 5 to make

representation before the competent authority

2026:UHC:3933

and the competent authority was asked to take

decision on the representation within four

weeks. He submits that pursuant to that order

passed by this Court, the impugned order has

been passed.

(4) This Court does not find any reason

to interfere with the impugned order dated

23.4.2026. Learned State Counsel is right in

submitting that once respondent no. 5

withdrew his consent for mutual transfer, then

transfer order could not have been passed by

relying on such request/consent, which stood

withdrawn. Thus, the competent authority was

justified in cancelling the order of transfer.

(5) Learned Counsel for the petitioner

submits that petitioner’s father is old and ailing

and it is not possible for him to survive in the

harsh climate of Pauri and proper medical

facilities are also not available at Pauri,

therefore petitioner be transferred to some

other Sugam place.

(6) This Court cannot pass such order to

transfer the petitioner at a particular place.

However, writ petition is disposed of granting

liberty to petitioner to make representation

regarding his transfer to some other Sugam

place. If he makes such representation within

three days from today, decision thereupon

shall be taken by the competent authority, as

per law, within ten days thereafter. Till decision

is taken on petitioner’s representation, status

quo as regards his posting shall be maintained.

(Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.)

20.5.2026

Pr

P KR UA MB AO RDH D2p9De.5oiN a5rg 7sti:4 et Btca:a E2N =l2lC50Iu0yNom ,s,d3 6ciobega .n00n 5Hr8e P262IdG Ra30 b ADH 1y BC8C O1P :O9,R D5s6UA HtE=4Bf 8KT 8OU9DUT+D1M0FH CAa 5 K9R'3RT6U5 0 MKE9HA 17AR4NB3 K9aDH4f,8A0NE2FD1Dc, 5o08u6=H2AIfGC6He aC1OA4UBR56T81 aOf03F52UeDTFb6A1R9C8AdK54H86AC2N5D073F, C91

2026:UHC:3933