Allahabad High Court
SIBBU KUMAR PATELversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS
- Decided
- Bench
- SIDDHARTH NANDAN
Holding
The court held that the petitioner must first file a representation before the second respondent within seven days, and the writ petition was disposed of.
Summary
The petitioner, Sibbu Kumar Patel, a foreman at a Government Industrial Training Institute in Ghazipur, challenged a transfer order on the ground that he has a 40% permanent disability in his left eye. He relied on Clause 5(iv) of the Transfer Policy dated 05.05.2026, which exempts employees with such disability from transfer unless there are complaints or compelling circumstances. The petitioner submitted a disability certificate issued by the Medical Authority, Ghazipur, to substantiate his claim. The court, after hearing counsel for both sides, found that the matter could be resolved without a full trial and ordered the petitioner to file a representation before the second respondent within seven days, attaching a certified copy of the order. The court further directed the second respondent to decide the representation expeditiously, preferably within two months, and disposed of the writ petition.
Issues considered
- Whether Clause 5(iv) of the Transfer Policy dated 05.05.2026 applies to an employee with 40% permanent disability, thereby exempting him from transfer.
- Whether the petitioner is required to first file a representation before the second respondent before approaching the court.
Legislation cited
- Uttar Pradesh Industrial Training Institute (Instructors) Service Rules, 1991
Subjects
- disability
- transfer policy
- service rules
- government employee
- writ petition
- representation
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - A No. - 14432 of 2026
Sibbu Kumar Patel
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 2 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Agnihotri Kumar Tripathi
Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C.
Court No. - 6
HON'BLE SIDDHARTH NANDAN, J.
1. Heard Sri Agnihotri Kumar Tripathi, Advocate appearing on behalf of the
petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the respondents-State.
2. The contention of the counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner is
working as a Foreman in the Government Industrial Training Institute,
Ghazipur, and his services are governed by the Uttar Pradesh Industrial
Training Institute (Instructors) Service Rules, 1991. Placing reliance on the
transfer policy dated 05.05.2026, Clause 5(iv), the impugned transfer order
has been assailed on the ground that an employee who is having 40%
disability may be kept outside the purview of the transfer, unless there are
complaints and compelling circumstances.
3. The disability certificate issued by the Medical Authority, Ghazipur, has
also been placed on record, which indicates that the petitioner has 40%
permanent disability in his left eye; and as such, the petitioner claims the
benefit of Clause 5(iv) of the Transfer Policy dated 05.05.2026.
4. Learned Standing Counsel submits that in case the petitioner moves
representation before the respondent no.2, the same shall be accorded due
consideration as per policy dated 05.05.2026.
5. In view of the aforesaid, no fruitful purpose would be served in keeping
the aforesaid writ petition pending and by the consent of the parties, the writ
petition is being decided at the admission stage, directing the petitioner to
file a representation before the respondent no.2 within 7 days from today,
along with the certified copy of this order; and in the event such a
WRIA No. 14432 of 2026
2
representation is filed by the petitioner within the said period, it is expected
that the respondent no.2 shall consider and decide the same expeditiously,
preferably within the next 2 months.
6. With the aforesaid observations/directions, the writ petition stands
disposed off.
(Siddharth Nandan,J.)
September 11, 2026
piyush
Digitally signed by :-
PIYUSH KUMAR
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…