ARVIND KUMAR SINGH Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for petitioner, learned State Counsel appearing on behalf of opposite parties 1 and 2 and Sri Pankaj Patel, learned counsel appearing on behalf of opposite parts 3 to 6.

(2.) It has been submitted by Sri Pankaj Patel, learned counsel for the Federation that vide order dated 20.11.2020, petitioner's impugned transfer order dated 19.10.2020 has been withdrawn and petitioner has again been posted in District Ayodhya where he was working earlier. It is as such submitted that the petition has become infructuous.

(3.) Learned counsel for petitioner while not disputing the fact that petitioner is now working in Ayodhya submits that earlier he was engaged in service as an Accountant vide order dated 02.08.2004 but now in the withdrawal order dated 20.11.2020 he has been posted in the Marketing Division which is not in conformity with the appointment letter.