Back
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
Manoj Kumar Tiwari, Pankaj Purohit, JJ
RAJESH KUMAR – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF UTTARAKHAND – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. factual background and procedural history of the transfer dispute. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. parties' contentions regarding transfer posting and pending representation. (Para 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 3. judicial mandate regarding timely disposal of administrative representation. (Para 8) |
1. Mr. Bhagwat Mehra, learned counsel for the petitioner.
2. Mr. K.N. Joshi, learned Deputy Advocate General for the State of Uttarakhand.
3. Mr. Anil K. Bisht, learned counsel for respondent no. 5.
4. Petitioner was serving as Assistant Engineer (Civil) in Irrigation Department. He was transferred from Sitarganj (Udham Singh Nagar) to Pithoragarh, vide order dated 09.06.2023. However, on his request, the said order was modified and petitioner was transferred to Betalghat (Nainital), instead of Pithoragarh. Thereafter another order was passed on 21.09.2023, whereby petitioner was asked to join at Betalghat (Nainital) in Irrigation Division (Sub- Division two Betalghat). Petitioner has challenged the said order in this writ petition, which was filed in 2024.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner joined duty at Betalghat (Nainital) on 25.06.2024 in terms of liberty granted by
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
