Research › Search › Judgment

Uttarakhand High Court · body

2022 DIGILAW 418 (UTT)

Nischay Kumar Joshi v. State of Uttarakhand

2022-12-19

ALOK KUMAR VERMA

body2022
JUDGMENT Alok Kumar Verma, J. - The present Writ Petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to consider the case of the petitioners for transfer in the present Annual Transfer Session 2022-23 from Remote area to Accessible area under the provisions of the Annual Transfer Act, 2017 and in view of the decision of the Committee, constituted under Section 27 of the Transfer Act, 2017. 2. Heard Mr. Vinay Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. P.C. Bisht, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State. 3. Mr. Vinay Kumar, Advocate submitted that the petitioners have completed more than 15 years of service in remote area, therefore, they are eligible to be transferred under compulsory transfer from remote to accessible area. 4. During the arguments, Mr. Vinay Kumar, the learned counsel for the petitioners, submitted that this petition may be disposed of by directing the respondent no.3 to decide their representations, for which, the petitioners will submit their representations to the respondent no. 3 within one week from today. Learned counsel for the petitioners also submitted that relaxation to the petitioners have already been granted under Section 27 of the said Transfer Act, 2017. 5. Learned counsel appearing for the State requested three weeks' time to decide the representation. 6. In view of the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties, and, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the present Writ Petition (S/S No. 2383 of 2022) is disposed of with a direction to the respondent no. 3, to consider and decide the representations of the petitioners, which will be submitted by the petitioners to the respondent no. 3 within a week from today, by a speaking order expeditiously preferably within a period of three weeks from the date of the receipt of the representations of the petitioners, in accordance with the relevant law. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merit of the case.