1. This present Special Appeal has been filed against the judgment and order dated 23rd July, 2010 passed by the learned Single Judge whereby the writ petition preferred by the present appellant against the order rejecting his representation against his transfer has been dismissed. The appellant is a Lekhpal, who is working in Tehsil Sadar, District Moradabad. He was transferred by an order dated 28th January, 2010, to Tehsil Sambhal, District Moradabad. The order dated 28th January, 2010, was challenged by the present appellant by means of Writ Petition No. 8339 (A) of 2010, which was disposed of by the judgment and order dated 17th February, 2010 of this Court with a direction to the respondent No. 2 therein i.e. the District Magistrate, Moradabad, to consider the claim of the petitioner and pass appropriate order in accordance with law, within a time bound period.
2. Pursuant thereto the appellant filed a representation before the District Magistrate which was decided vide order dated 23rd June, 2010. The representation has been rejected on the ground that the transfer has been made on administrative ground. The order dated 23rd June, 2010, was again challenged by the present appellant by means of Writ Petition No. 42833(A) of 2010, which has been dismissed by the learned Single Judge by the impugned Judgment and order dated 23rd July, 2010 giving rise to the present appeal.
3. We have heard Sri Daya Shankar Mishra, learned Counsel for the appellant and have perused the judgment and order dated 23rd July, 2010, as also the grounds taken in the memo of the appeal and the documents filed alongwith it.
4. Sri Daya Shankar Mishra, learned Counsel submitted that the learned Single Judge has erred in law in dismissing the writ petition on the ground that the order of transfer cannot be challenged. He further submitted that the learned Single Judge was not right in holding that the plea which was raised in the writ petition and if not considered by the District Magistrate could be taken to have been dis-allowed is not correct in as much as the learned Single Judge did not adjudicate on the various points raised in the writ petition and relegated the appellant to make a claim before the District Magistrate. He further submitted that the finding recorded by the learned Single Judge was prior to the order passed by the authorities asking him to do the census work. He further submitted that in terms of the Government order the appellant was entitled to continue to remain posted at Tehsil Sadar for a period of ten years and there are number of persons, who have completed more than ten years and have not been transferred. Therefore, the action is arbitrary and malafide.
5. We have given our thoughtful consideration to the various pleas raised by learned Counsel for the parties and find that even though the order of transfer was subsequent to the order giving census duty that will not make any difference, as in our considered opinion the census duty can be undertaken by the successor who comes in place of the present appellant. The appellant has been transferred on the administrative ground and we are not inclined to interfere in the said decision taken by the authorities.
6. So far as the plea raised that other persons who have completed more than ten years have not been transferred, we may mention here that it is for the authorities to consider as to which person is to be transferred on administrative ground. No other point has been raised.
7. In view of the entire above discussion, we do not find any reason to interfere with the judgment rendered by the Single Judge.
8. The appeal fails and is dismissed.
