D.S. Sinha, J. - (1.) HEARD Sri Anupam Shukla, learned counsel for the petitioner. The petitioner, a Forest Ranger, serving in the district of Dehradun of the State of Uttar Pradesh, invokes the jurisdiction of this court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to agitate against his transfer to Haldwani.
(2.) IN view of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India rendered in the case of Gujarat Electricity Board and others v. Atma Ram : A.I.R. 1989 S.C. 1433 the appropriate remedy of the petitioner is to make a representation to the higher authority, and not a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Sri Anupam Shukla draws the attention of the court towards the Government Order dated 1st June 1992, a photocopy whereof is annexure '5' to the writ petition. According to paragraph 5 of this Government Order, the petitioner is debarred from making any representation against the transfer.
(3.) THE court is of the opinion that in view of the law laid down by the Supreme Court in Gujarat Electricity Board and others v. Atma Ram (Supra) to the effect that the appropriate remedy of an employee in the matter of transfer is representation, the provision in the Government Order dated 1st June, 1992 prohibiting the employee from making any representation in the matter of transfer, is bad in law. The Court, therefore, permits the petitioner to make a representation and expects that the appropriate authority shall consider his representation on merits notwithstanding the prohibition contained in paragraph 5 of the Government Order dated 1st June 1992.;