Hareshwar Sharma v. Counsel for

Shamim Uddin Khan, learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms. Archana Tyagi, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel, who appears for State- respondents.

2. Impugned in the present proceedings at the instance of the writ petitioner is an order dated 18.09.2025 passed by the Engineer-in-Chief (Parikalp Evam Niyojan), Irrigation Evam Water Resources Vibhag, U.P, Lucknow whereby the writ petitioner has been sought to be transferred from the post of Jiledar in the office of Executive Engineer, Aligarh Khand Ganga Nahar, Aligarh to the office of Adhishashi Abhiyanta, Anusandhan Evam Niyozan Khand, Jhansi.

3. The case of the writ petitioner is that the writ petitioner was appointed as Irrigation Supervisor in the Irrigation Department on 04.03.1995 and thereafter promoted on 09.05.2025 on the post of Jiledar whereat he remained posted at Aliagarh Khand Ganga Nahar, Aligarh. As per the writ petitioner, he contested the elections for the office of Prantiya Mahamantri of the Sinchai Rajasva Adhikari Sangh, U.P. and secured 144 votes and whereas bearer candidature, Mr. Dharmendra Singh obtained 121 votes accordingly, the writ petitioner was declared to be elected for the office of Prantiya Mahamantri and a press note to the said effects came to be issued on 19.08.2025. Allegation is that Shri Dharmendra Singh being defeated, bore grudge and animosity against the writ petitioner and hatched up the conspiracy against the writ petitioner. 2 WRIA No. 15045 of 2025

4. Allegation is that while the writ petitioner was sitting in a close room, he started discussion with respect to the working of certain members including MP and in the close door meeting between certain persons, certain facts were uttered by the writ petitioner which got recorded by Shri Dharmendra Singh and the same was forwarded to his friends and the same became viral. A show cause notice came to be issued on 18.09.2025 by the second respondent containing the allegation referable to uttering of certain works which were alleged to be objectionable and the writ petitioner tendered its reply on 18.09.2025 and thereafter on 18.09.2025 itself the impugned transfer order came to be passed by the second respondent transferring the writ petitioner from the post of Jiledar in the office Executive Engineer, Aligarh Khand Ganga Nahar, Aligarh to the post of Jiledar in the office of Adhishashi Abhiyanta, Anusandhan Evam Niyozan Khand, Jhansi. A relieving order also came to be passed on 18.09.2005 itself.

5. Questioning the transfer as well as the relieving order, the writ petitioner has been filed the present writ petition.

6. On 07.10.2025, this Court proceeded to pass the following orders: "Contention of the learned Senior Counsel for the writ petitioner is that the impugned transfer order is a punitive based upon the recommendations dated 09.09.2025,

10.09.2025 and 12.09.2025 though it is being shown to be on administrative grounds. Submission is that inter se election between the parties became a factor for rivalry which stemmed the circumstances in that regard. Further submission is that the writ petitioner cannot be transfer within a period of two years being an election bearer. Ms. Archana Tyagi, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel seeks time to examine the matter and to place before this Court the recommendations. Put up this case on 10.10.2025 as fresh."

7. Ms. Archana Tyagi has produced before this Court the instructions dated

09.10.2025 under the signatures of the Executive Engineer, Aligarh Khand Ganga Nahar, Aligarh, third respondent, which runs to 32 pages.

8. A statement has been made by Ms. Archana Tyagi that she does not propose to file any affidavit as according to her, she well-equipped with the instructions which are self-sufficient for disposal of the writ petition. With 3 WRIA No. 15045 of 2025 the consent of the parties, the writ petition is being decided at the fresh stage.

9. Learned counsel for the writ petitioner while assailing the transfer and the relieving order has sought to argue that the transfer and the relieving order cannot be sustained even for a single moment as though it has been shown to be on administrative grounds but a perusal of the transfer order would reveal that the same is punitive in nature. Submission is that the entire basis for transferring the writ petitioner by virtue of the impugned transfer order is relatable to the fact that in a close room, certain utterances and statements were made by the writ petitioner which were purely personal and there was no intention to harm honour and the dignitary of any of the functionaries or the member of the ruling party, however, Shri Dharmendra Singh who happened to be a defeated candidate for the office of Prantiya Mahamantri of Sinchai Rajasva Adhikari Sangh, U.P., he for the reasons other than bona fide in order to tarnish and dislodge the writ petitioner had got the said clipping/ recordings viral which became the basis of transfer. He submits that transfer order is nothing but a classic example of a punitive piece of order and resorting to transfer that too punitively is something novel and foreign to service jurisprudence. He further submits that the transfer order taken into account the recommendations dated 09.09.2025, 10.09.2025 and

12.09.2025, thus, the said order has not been passed by the disciplinary authority while independent application of mind, however, the same is on the basis of the recommendation and the dictates of the person making the recommendations. He thus submits that the transfer order be set aside.

10. Ms. Archana Tyagi, learned Standing Counsel on the other hand submits that though the recommendations were sent by the Executive Engineer, Aligarh Khand Ganga Nahar, Aligarh on 09.09.2025, Superintending Engineer, Drainage Circle, Aligarh on 10.09.2025 and Chief Engineer (Ganga), Irrigation and Water Resources Dept., IDUP, Meerut on

12.09.2025 however, reference has been made for proceedings against the writ petitioner under the provisions of Uttar Pradesh Government Employees Servants (Discipline and Appeal) Rule, 1999 while instituted departmental proceedings, the writ petitioner had been transferred on administrative grounds.

11. Ms. Archana Tyagi pre recess when the matter was taken up had taken 4 WRIA No. 15045 of 2025 time to take instructions as according to her, though the transfer order is on administrative grounds but it taken into account the recommendations dated

09.09.2025, 10.09.2025 and 12.09.2025 of the Executive Engineer, Aligarh Khand Ganga Nahar, Aligarh, Superintending Engineer, Drainage Circle, Aligarh and Chief Engineer (Ganga), Irrigation and Water Resources Dept., IDUP, Meerut, post recess, she has stated that the transfer orders and the relieving order be set aside granting liberty to the competent authority to pass fresh orders strictly in accordance with law.

12. To such a submission, Sri Radha Kant Ojha, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Shri Shamim Uddin Khan, learned counsel for the petitioner has no objection.

13. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the records carefully.

14. The transfer order dated 18.09.2025 reads as under: "मुख्य अिभयन्ता (गंगा) मेरठ के प्ऴांक 9591/मु०अ० गंगा/ई-4/ िजलेदार (डीसीए) िदनांक 12.09.2025 अधी्षण अिभयन्ता, ्ऱेनेज मण्डल, अलीगढ के प्ऴांक 5172/डीसीए / जांच/सी-5/ न०्ऺो० िजलेदार, िदनांक

10.09.2025 तथा अिधशासी अिभयन्ता, अलीगढ खण्ड गंगा नहर, अलीगढ़ के प्ऴांक 4308/ई०सी०- 3/न०्ऺो० िजलेदार, िदनांक 09.09.2025 ्षारा की गयी संस्तुितयों के आधार पर ्शी हरे्षर शमार् (जन्मितिथ

25.06.1974) िजलेदार को ्ऺशासिनक आधार पर कायार्लय अिधशासी अिभयन्ता, अलीगढ खण्ड गंगा नहर, अलीगढ से कायार्लय अिधशासी अिभयन्ता, अनुसंधान एवं िनयोजन खण्ड, झांसी में स्थानान्तिरत िकये जाने के आदेश एत्षारा िनगर्त िकये जाते हैं। उ्व आदेश तत्काल ्ऺभाव से लागू होंगे।"

15. A bare look of the transfer order reveals that the same has been passed on the recommendations dated 09.09.2025, 10.09.2025 and 12.09.2025 whereat the recommendation was made that the writ petitioner be transferred else he would interfere and influence the departmental proceedings which would be initiated under the Uttar Pradesh Government Employees Servants (Discipline and Appeal) Rule, 1999.

16. Since a statement has been made by Ms. Archana Tyagi that the transfer order be set aside leaving it open for the second respondent, Engineer-in- Chief (Parikalp Evam Niyojan), Irrigation Evam Water Resources Vibhag, U.P, Lucknow to pass a fresh orders strictly in accordance with law, thus, 5 WRIA No. 15045 of 2025 this Court is not delving into further issue.

17. Accordingly, the writ petition is being decided in the following manner: (a) The order dated 18.09.2025 transfer the writ petitioner from post of Jiledar in the officer of Executive Engineer, Aligarh Khand Ganga Nahar, Aligarh to the post of Jiledar in the office of Adhishashi Abhiyanta, Anusandhan Evam Niyozan Khand, Jhansi and the relieving order dated

18.09.2025 passed by the Executive Engineer, Aligarh Khand Ganga Nahar, Aligarh are set aside. (b). It is left open for the competent authority to pass a fresh orders strictly in accordance with.

18. With the aforesaid observation, the writ petition is disposed off.

19. Instructions have been filed today is taken on record and marked as Appendix-A. October 10, 2025 A. Prajapati (Vikas Budhwar,J.) ASHUTOSH KUMAR PRAJAPATI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Shamim Uddin Khan, learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms. Archana Tyagi, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel, who appears for State- respondents.

2. Impugned in the present proceedings at the instance of the writ petitioner is an order dated 18.09.2025 passed by the Engineer-in-Chief (Parikalp Evam Niyojan), Irrigation Evam Water Resources Vibhag, U.P, Lucknow whereby the writ petitioner has been sought to be transferred from the post of Jiledar in the office of Executive Engineer, Aligarh Khand Ganga Nahar, Aligarh to the office of Adhishashi Abhiyanta, Anusandhan Evam Niyozan Khand, Jhansi.

3. The case of the writ petitioner is that the writ petitioner was appointed as Irrigation Supervisor in the Irrigation Department on 04.03.1995 and thereafter promoted on 09.05.2025 on the post of Jiledar whereat he remained posted at Aliagarh Khand Ganga Nahar, Aligarh. As per the writ petitioner, he contested the elections for the office of Prantiya Mahamantri of the Sinchai Rajasva Adhikari Sangh, U.P. and secured 144 votes and whereas bearer candidature, Mr. Dharmendra Singh obtained 121 votes accordingly, the writ petitioner was declared to be elected for the office of Prantiya Mahamantri and a press note to the said effects came to be issued on 19.08.2025. Allegation is that Shri Dharmendra Singh being defeated, bore grudge and animosity against the writ petitioner and hatched up the conspiracy against the writ petitioner. 2 WRIA No. 15045 of 2025

4. Allegation is that while the writ petitioner was sitting in a close room, he started discussion with respect to the working of certain members including MP and in the close door meeting between certain persons, certain facts were uttered by the writ petitioner which got recorded by Shri Dharmendra Singh and the same was forwarded to his friends and the same became viral. A show cause notice came to be issued on 18.09.2025 by the second respondent containing the allegation referable to uttering of certain works which were alleged to be objectionable and the writ petitioner tendered its reply on 18.09.2025 and thereafter on 18.09.2025 itself the impugned transfer order came to be passed by the second respondent transferring the writ petitioner from the post of Jiledar in the office Executive Engineer, Aligarh Khand Ganga Nahar, Aligarh to the post of Jiledar in the office of Adhishashi Abhiyanta, Anusandhan Evam Niyozan Khand, Jhansi. A relieving order also came to be passed on 18.09.2005 itself.

5. Questioning the transfer as well as the relieving order, the writ petitioner has been filed the present writ petition.

6. On 07.10.2025, this Court proceeded to pass the following orders: "Contention of the learned Senior Counsel for the writ petitioner is that the impugned transfer order is a punitive based upon the recommendations dated 09.09.2025,

10.09.2025 and 12.09.2025 though it is being shown to be on administrative grounds. Submission is that inter se election between the parties became a factor for rivalry which stemmed the circumstances in that regard. Further submission is that the writ petitioner cannot be transfer within a period of two years being an election bearer. Ms. Archana Tyagi, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel seeks time to examine the matter and to place before this Court the recommendations. Put up this case on 10.10.2025 as fresh."

7. Ms. Archana Tyagi has produced before this Court the instructions dated

09.10.2025 under the signatures of the Executive Engineer, Aligarh Khand Ganga Nahar, Aligarh, third respondent, which runs to 32 pages.

8. A statement has been made by Ms. Archana Tyagi that she does not propose to file any affidavit as according to her, she well-equipped with the instructions which are self-sufficient for disposal of the writ petition. With 3 WRIA No. 15045 of 2025 the consent of the parties, the writ petition is being decided at the fresh stage.

9. Learned counsel for the writ petitioner while assailing the transfer and the relieving order has sought to argue that the transfer and the relieving order cannot be sustained even for a single moment as though it has been shown to be on administrative grounds but a perusal of the transfer order would reveal that the same is punitive in nature. Submission is that the entire basis for transferring the writ petitioner by virtue of the impugned transfer order is relatable to the fact that in a close room, certain utterances and statements were made by the writ petitioner which were purely personal and there was no intention to harm honour and the dignitary of any of the functionaries or the member of the ruling party, however, Shri Dharmendra Singh who happened to be a defeated candidate for the office of Prantiya Mahamantri of Sinchai Rajasva Adhikari Sangh, U.P., he for the reasons other than bona fide in order to tarnish and dislodge the writ petitioner had got the said clipping/ recordings viral which became the basis of transfer. He submits that transfer order is nothing but a classic example of a punitive piece of order and resorting to transfer that too punitively is something novel and foreign to service jurisprudence. He further submits that the transfer order taken into account the recommendations dated 09.09.2025, 10.09.2025 and

12.09.2025, thus, the said order has not been passed by the disciplinary authority while independent application of mind, however, the same is on the basis of the recommendation and the dictates of the person making the recommendations. He thus submits that the transfer order be set aside.

10. Ms. Archana Tyagi, learned Standing Counsel on the other hand submits that though the recommendations were sent by the Executive Engineer, Aligarh Khand Ganga Nahar, Aligarh on 09.09.2025, Superintending Engineer, Drainage Circle, Aligarh on 10.09.2025 and Chief Engineer (Ganga), Irrigation and Water Resources Dept., IDUP, Meerut on

12.09.2025 however, reference has been made for proceedings against the writ petitioner under the provisions of Uttar Pradesh Government Employees Servants (Discipline and Appeal) Rule, 1999 while instituted departmental proceedings, the writ petitioner had been transferred on administrative grounds.

11. Ms. Archana Tyagi pre recess when the matter was taken up had taken 4 WRIA No. 15045 of 2025 time to take instructions as according to her, though the transfer order is on administrative grounds but it taken into account the recommendations dated

09.09.2025, 10.09.2025 and 12.09.2025 of the Executive Engineer, Aligarh Khand Ganga Nahar, Aligarh, Superintending Engineer, Drainage Circle, Aligarh and Chief Engineer (Ganga), Irrigation and Water Resources Dept., IDUP, Meerut, post recess, she has stated that the transfer orders and the relieving order be set aside granting liberty to the competent authority to pass fresh orders strictly in accordance with law.

12. To such a submission, Sri Radha Kant Ojha, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Shri Shamim Uddin Khan, learned counsel for the petitioner has no objection.

13. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the records carefully.

14. The transfer order dated 18.09.2025 reads as under: "मुख्य अिभयन्ता (गंगा) मेरठ के प्ऴांक 9591/मु०अ० गंगा/ई-4/ िजलेदार (डीसीए) िदनांक 12.09.2025 अधी्षण अिभयन्ता, ्ऱेनेज मण्डल, अलीगढ के प्ऴांक 5172/डीसीए / जांच/सी-5/ न०्ऺो० िजलेदार, िदनांक

10.09.2025 तथा अिधशासी अिभयन्ता, अलीगढ खण्ड गंगा नहर, अलीगढ़ के प्ऴांक 4308/ई०सी०- 3/न०्ऺो० िजलेदार, िदनांक 09.09.2025 ्षारा की गयी संस्तुितयों के आधार पर ्शी हरे्षर शमार् (जन्मितिथ

25.06.1974) िजलेदार को ्ऺशासिनक आधार पर कायार्लय अिधशासी अिभयन्ता, अलीगढ खण्ड गंगा नहर, अलीगढ से कायार्लय अिधशासी अिभयन्ता, अनुसंधान एवं िनयोजन खण्ड, झांसी में स्थानान्तिरत िकये जाने के आदेश एत्षारा िनगर्त िकये जाते हैं। उ्व आदेश तत्काल ्ऺभाव से लागू होंगे।"

15. A bare look of the transfer order reveals that the same has been passed on the recommendations dated 09.09.2025, 10.09.2025 and 12.09.2025 whereat the recommendation was made that the writ petitioner be transferred else he would interfere and influence the departmental proceedings which would be initiated under the Uttar Pradesh Government Employees Servants (Discipline and Appeal) Rule, 1999.

16. Since a statement has been made by Ms. Archana Tyagi that the transfer order be set aside leaving it open for the second respondent, Engineer-in- Chief (Parikalp Evam Niyojan), Irrigation Evam Water Resources Vibhag, U.P, Lucknow to pass a fresh orders strictly in accordance with law, thus, 5 WRIA No. 15045 of 2025 this Court is not delving into further issue.

17. Accordingly, the writ petition is being decided in the following manner: (a) The order dated 18.09.2025 transfer the writ petitioner from post of Jiledar in the officer of Executive Engineer, Aligarh Khand Ganga Nahar, Aligarh to the post of Jiledar in the office of Adhishashi Abhiyanta, Anusandhan Evam Niyozan Khand, Jhansi and the relieving order dated

18.09.2025 passed by the Executive Engineer, Aligarh Khand Ganga Nahar, Aligarh are set aside. (b). It is left open for the competent authority to pass a fresh orders strictly in accordance with.

18. With the aforesaid observation, the writ petition is disposed off.

19. Instructions have been filed today is taken on record and marked as Appendix-A. October 10, 2025 A. Prajapati (Vikas Budhwar,J.) ASHUTOSH KUMAR PRAJAPATI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad