Alok Mathur,J.

1. Heard Sri Piyush Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Ms. Deep Shikha, Chief Standing counsel for the respondents.

2. By means of the present petition the petitioner has challenged his transfer from Fatehpur to Etawah by means of order dated 22.6.2022. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that previously by means of order dated 13.7.2021 he was transferred from Farrukhabad to Fatehpur but when he was going to join at Fatehpur he met with an accident due to which he sustained serious injuries in his femur bone and, hence, he could not joint at the transferred place of posting. In the aforesaid circumstance, the petitioner approached this Court by means of a petition challenging the said transfer order which was interfered by this Court in Writ A N.2040 of 2022 and was disposed of by means of order dated 11.4.2022 whereby he was given liberty to submit a representation against the transfer order and the respondents were directed to decide the same by a speaking and reasoned order within a period of eight weeks and in the meanwhile the respondents were restrained from taking any coercive action against the petitioner. In pursuance of the aforesaid order the petitioner continued to discharge his duties at Farrukhabad. After one year the impugned transfer order has been passed and now the petitioner has been transferred to Etawah. Now the petitioner has raised the same grievance.

3. This Court is of the considered view that on the previous occasion this Court had taken a compassionate view with regard to the petitioner that he suffered seriously in an accident and restrained the opposite parties from taking coercive action against him and on the strength of the interim order he continued at the previous place of posting i.e. Farrukhabad. The petitioner has recuperated from the said accident but has suffered disability of 40 percent and is having difficulty in locomotion.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that his grievances shall be substantially redressed in case the respondents are directed to consider his representation sympathetically with regard to his disability.

5. Learned State counsel does not have any objection in case such a direction is given to the opposite parties to decide the representation.

6. In light of the above, the present petition is disposed of with a liberty to the petitioner to move a fresh representation within a period of ten days from today and in case such a representation along with a certified copy of this order is moved, opposite party No.2 shall consider and decide the same within a period of three weeks thereafter by passing a reasoned and speaking order and communicate the same to the petitioner.

7. It is made clear that this Court has not interfered with the order of transfer.