NIAZ AHMAD Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) D. K. Seth, J. The petitioner was transferred by an order dated 2-7-1997 from Etawah to Firozabad while one Shri Ranvir Singh Chauhan was transferred from Firozabad to Etawah.

(2.) LEARNED Counsel for the petitioner Shri Umesh Chandra Mishra contends that the petitioner's wife is posted in the same department at Etawah. In violation of paragraph 8 (2) of the Government Order dated 15-4-1997 the petitioner was transferred while the wife is still posted at Etawah. He has also contended that petitioner's children are admitted in the local school and that his transfer is mid-session one. He also contends that there are many persons who were posted at Etawah for more than 20 years had not been transferred whereas the petitioner had worked only 19 years at Etawah. He further contends that the petitioner has been transferred on account of letter con tained in Annexure-8 to the writ petition addressed by one Member of Legislative Assembly.

(3.) SO far as the question of transfer of the petitioner alone while his wife has been left out is concerned, I am not in clined to interfere with the same on the ground that the petitioner was posted in the same place for about 18 years. The said Government policy is only a guideline and does not have any statutory or binding force. If on an administration exigency a person is to be transferred it is open to the administration to transfer such person.