Authority must decide the transfer representation within three weeks, considering the recommendation and impending retirement.

The petitioner and respondent No. 5 were promoted from Senior Agricultural Development Officer to Assistant Director Agriculture. Before the impugned posting order dated 31 August 2026, the petitioner was serving in the office of the Joint Director, Gwalior Division. The order posted both officers to the office of the Deputy Director, Gwalior, but the petitioner claimed that respondent No. 5 was posted there without accommodating him.

The petitioner submitted a representation on 2 September 2026; the Joint Director recommended on 16 September 2026 that he be accommodated on the post, or alternatively posted to one of two specified posts. The representation and recommendation remained undecided. The petitioner was due to retire on 31 May 2027.

Whether the petitioner’s pending representation concerning his posting should be considered and decided by respondent No. 2, taking account of the Joint Director’s recommendation and the petitioner’s impending retirement.

Whether the petitioner should be permitted to continue at his existing place of posting until the representation is decided.

The petition was brought under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

The Court applied the administrative-law requirement that a pending representation be considered in accordance with law and determined through a reasoned and speaking order.

It cited no statute or precedent as the basis for its directions.

The Court noted that the petitioner’s representation and the Joint Director’s recommendation had not yet been considered by respondent No. 2.

Rather than determine the merits of the petitioner’s claim to a particular posting, the Court directed the competent authority to decide the representation in accordance with law, expressly considering the recommendation and the petitioner’s impending retirement.

It also preserved the status quo at the petitioner’s current place of posting pending that decision.

It directed respondent No. 2 to decide the representation dated 2 September 2026 by a reasoned and speaking order, considering the recommendation dated 16 September 2026 and the petitioner’s retirement date, within three weeks of receiving a certified copy of the order. Until then, the respondents must permit the petitioner to continue at his present place of posting.