Allahabad High Court
SURENDRA KUMARversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 5 OTHERS
- Decided
- Bench
- MANISH KUMAR NIGAM
Holding
The Court directed respondent No.3 to decide on the pending transfer recommendation within four weeks, after hearing, and ordered that the petitioner not be removed pending that decision.
Summary
The petitioner, Surendra Kumar, filed a writ petition seeking quashing of two orders dated 10.08.2026 and 22.08.2026 and a mandamus directing the respondents to allow him to continue as a Rojgar Sewak in Gram Panchayat Battupur with due honorarium. He argued that his mother’s election as Gram Pradhan required his transfer, and that a recommendation dated 14.11.2025 by the Block Development Officer for his transfer to Battupur was pending approval from respondent No.3. The respondents contended that the petitioner had not yet been removed and only a direction to convene a Gram Sabha meeting had been issued. The Court held that respondent No.3 must decide on the pending recommendation within four weeks, after giving a hearing, and that the petitioner should not be removed pending that decision. Accordingly, the petition was disposed with the said direction.
Issues considered
- Whether the orders dated 10.08.2026 and 22.08.2026 should be quashed.
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to a mandamus directing his continued employment as Rojgar Sewak with honorarium.
- Whether respondent No.3 is obligated to decide on the Block Development Officer’s recommendation within a stipulated period.
Subjects
- Rojgar Sewak
- Gram Panchayat
- certiorari
- mandamus
- honorarium
- administrative order
- block development officer
- employment transfer
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - A No. - 16086 of 2026
Surendra Kumar
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 5 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Balram Jee Verma
Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Pankaj Kumar Gupta
Court No. - 33
HON'BLE MANISH KUMAR NIGAM, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for the
State and perused the record.
2. The instant writ petition has been filed for the following relief:
"i) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the
impugned order dated 10.08.2026 (Ann-16) passed by respondent no. 3
and consequential order dated 22.08.2026 (Ann-17) passed by respondent
no. 4.
ii) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing
the respondents to allow the petitioner to work in Gram Panchayat
Battupur as Rojgar Sewak and pay him hence forth honorarium month by
month and also arrears honorarium due since month of April, 2025."
3. Contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that because of the
election of his mother as Gram Pradhan, the petitioner who was working as
Rojgar Sewak was liable to be shifted to other Gram Sabha in view of the
Government Order issued by the State-Government. It has been further
contended that recommendation has been made by the Block Development
Officer on 14.11.2025 to the respondent no. 3 for approval for changing the
place of working of the petitioner from Narayanpur to Battupur. The said
recommendation is still pending and now by the order impugned, the
respondents are taking action for removal of the petitioner.
4. Learned Standing Counsel has submitted that the petitioner has yet not
WRIA No. 16086 of 2026
2
been removed and only a direction has been issued to convene meeting of
the Gram Sabha.
5. Since, Block Development Officer has recommended that change of place
of working of the petitioner and has sought approval form respondent no. 3
by his letter dated 14.11.2025, it would be appropriate that respondent no. 3
shall take decision upon the matter referred to him by the Block
Development Officer, in accordance with law, expeditiously, preferably
within a period of four weeks from the date of production of a certified copy
of this order after giving opportunity of hearing to the parties concerned
provided that there is no other legal impediment.
6. Till the disposal of the matter by respondent no. 3, the petitioner will
not be removed from his post on which the petitioner is working.
7. With the aforesaid direction, this petition stands disposed of.
(Manish Kumar Nigam,J.)
October 1, 2026
Ved Prakash
Digitally signed by :-
VED PRAKASH SHARMA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…