Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Manoj Kumar Singh and ors. Vs. the State of Jharkhand and ors.

Manoj Kumar Singh and ors. vs The State of Jharkhand and ors.

Type Court Judgment Court Jharkhand Decided Feb 25, 2008
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/515461

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Jharkhand High Court
Judge
Decided On
Subject
Service

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Service - Transfer - Order of transfer challenged on the ground that final allocation of cadre has not been made - Respondents taking the stand that there is no bar for transferring the Petitioners, as they belong to general cadre of Constable/Havildar - As final allocation of constables/Havildars is pending, Petiti...

Key legal issue
Service

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Manoj Kumar Singh and ors.

Advocate Mr. Pathak

Respondent

The State of Jharkhand and ors.

Legal References

Reported In
2008(56)BLJR2150; [2008(2)JCR669(Jhr)]

Excerpt

service - transfer - order of transfer challenged on the ground that final allocation of cadre has not been made - respondents taking the stand that there is no bar for transferring the petitioners, as they belong to general cadre of constable/havildar - as final allocation of constables/havildars is pending, petitioners given liberty to make representation before chairman, advisory committee. - motor vehicles act, 1988[c.a.no.59/1988] section 166; [a.k. patnaik, cj, a.k. gohil & s. samvatsar, jj] application for compensation for personal injury death of injured claimant subsequently for some other reasons held, claim for personal injury will abate on the death of claimant. claim will not survive to his legal representative except as regards claim for pecuniary loss to estate of claimant.ramesh kumar merathia, j.1. the petitioners' grievance is that the order of the petitioners has not been finally bifurcated.2. mr. pathak, appearing for the petitioners, submitted that the petitioners were asked to give option for their cadre division. a tentative list was prepared by which the petitioners were posted in the state of jharkhand till final allocation but final allocation has not been done as yet and without such allocation, the respondents authorities are taking steps transferring the petitioners from the department of wireless to other wings of the home department.3. the stand of the respondents in the counter affidavit is that the final allocation of the constable/havildar is pending regarding transfer of the petitioners pending final allocation, it is said that there is no bar for transferring the petitioners, as they belong to general cadre of constable/havildar and, as such, they can be transformed from wireless to other wings of the department.4. this position has not been disputed by the petitioners by filing any rejoinder and, therefore, the said stand in the counter affidavit is accepted.5. however, as admittedly the final a location of the constables/havildars is pending, the petitioners will be at liberty to make representation before the chairman. advisory committee, patna (respondent no. 3) through director general of police, jharkhand (respondent no. 6), who will look into the matter and do the needful in accordance with law, as early as possible and preferably within three months from the date of receipt of such representation.with these observations and direction, this writ petition is disposed of.

Full Judgment

Ramesh Kumar Merathia, J.

1. The petitioners' grievance is that the order of the petitioners has not been finally bifurcated.

2. Mr. Pathak, appearing for the petitioners, submitted that the petitioners were asked to give option for their cadre division. A tentative list was prepared by which the petitioners were posted in the State of Jharkhand till final allocation but final allocation has not been done as yet and without such allocation, the respondents authorities are taking steps transferring the petitioners from the department of Wireless to other wings of the Home department.

3. The stand of the respondents in the counter affidavit is that the final allocation of the Constable/Havildar is pending Regarding transfer of the petitioners pending final allocation, it is said that there is no bar for transferring the petitioners, as they belong to general cadre of Constable/Havildar and, as such, they can be transformed from Wireless to other wings of the department.

4. This position has not been disputed by the petitioners by filing any rejoinder and, therefore, the said stand in the counter affidavit is accepted.

5. However, as admittedly the final a location of the Constables/Havildars is pending, the petitioners will be at liberty to make representation before the Chairman. Advisory Committee, Patna (respondent No. 3) through Director General of Police, Jharkhand (respondent No. 6), who will look into the matter and do the needful in accordance with law, as early as possible and preferably within three months from the date of receipt of such representation.

With these observations and direction, this writ petition is disposed of.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial