Allahabad High Court
SUDHIR KUMARversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND 4 OTHERS
- Decided
- Bench
- DINESH PATHAK
Holding
The Court declined to issue mandamus and disposed of the petition, directing the petitioner to approach the Managing Director with his grievance.
Summary
The petitioner, Sudhir Kumar, filed a writ petition seeking mandamus directing the Respondent No. 2 to consider his representation dated 08.02.2023 and subsequent reminders, to stay an order of Respondent No. 3 dated 08.07.2026, and to allow him to continue working at the Puranpur branch due to family problems. The Court examined the grievance but found that keeping the petition pending would not serve any useful purpose. Without addressing the merits, the Court directed the petitioner to file an appropriate application before the Managing Director (Respondent No. 2) within three weeks, attaching a certified copy of the order. The Court further directed Respondent No. 2 to consider the representation and decide within three months. Consequently, the writ petition was disposed of.
Issues considered
- Whether the Court should issue a mandamus directing the respondent to consider the petitioner's representation and stay the impugned order.
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to continue his posting at the Puranpur branch pending resolution of his grievance.
Subjects
- writ petition
- mandamus
- service posting
- administrative grievance
- Allahabad High Court
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - A No. - 12168 of 2026
Sudhir Kumar
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of Uttar Pradesh And 4 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Surya Pratap Singh
Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Manoj Nigam
Court No. - 32
HON'BLE DINESH PATHAK, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel
representing State-respondents and perused the record on board.
2. This writ petition has been filed, inter alia, seeking the following
reliefs:
"A. a writ, order or direction, in the nature of mandamus,
commanding the Respondent No. 2 to consider the representation
of the Petitioner dated 08.02.2023 as well as reminder dated
26.04.2026 & 29.07.2026.
B. a writ, order or direction, in the nature of mandamus,
commanding the Respondent No. 3 stay the effect and operation of
the impugned order passed by respondent no. 3 dated 08.07.2026.
C. a writ, order or direction, in the nature of mandamus
commanding the respondents to allow the petitioner to continue
working at Branch-Puranpur District-Pilibhit"
3. The petitioner has raised a grievance regarding his present place
posting on the ground of certain family problem.
4. Having regard to the grievance raised by the petitioner, in the
opinion of the Court, no useful purpose would be served by keeping
this matter pending. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on
the merits of the case, this Court deems it appropriate to finally
dispose of the present writ petition with a direction that the petitioner
shall be at liberty to move an appropriate application ventilating his
grievances before the Managing Director (respondent No. 2), as
averred in the present writ petition, within a period of three weeks
from today, along with a certified copy of this order and a self attested
copy of the present writ petition. Upon receipt of the said
representation, the respondent No. 2 shall consider and decide the
same in accordance with law expeditiously, preferably, within a period
of three months from the date of production of such representation.
WRIA No. 12168 of 2026
2
5. With the aforesaid observation and direction, present writ petition
stands disposed of.
September 9, 2026
vinay
(Dinesh Pathak,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
VINAY KUMAR
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…