Thursday, 14, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

The State Of Maharashtra Through Its ... vs Hareshwar Raghunath Ghuge And Others
2024 Latest Caselaw 23057 Bom

Citation : 2024 Latest Caselaw 23057 Bom
Judgement Date : 7 August, 2024

Bombay High Court

The State Of Maharashtra Through Its ... vs Hareshwar Raghunath Ghuge And Others on 7 August, 2024

Author: Ravindra V. Ghuge

Bench: Ravindra V. Ghuge

2024:BHC-AUG:17743-DB


                                              *1*                     933wp8316o24


                     IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                 BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                          933 WRIT PETITION NO. 8316 OF 2024
                      THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH ITS
                               SECRETARY AND ANOTHER
                                          VERSUS
                    HARESHWAR RAGHUNATH GHUGE AND OTHERS
                                              ...
                Ms.Neha B. Kamble, AGP for the Petitioners/State.
                Shri P.M. Nagargoje, Advocate for Respondent No.1.
                Shri Alok Sharma, Advocate for Respondent No.2.
                                              ...

                                  CORAM : RAVINDRA V. GHUGE
                                                   &
                                          Y. G. KHOBRAGADE, JJ.

DATE :- 07th August, 2024

Per Court :-

1. The State Government is before this Court

challenging the judgment and order dated 21.03.2024, delivered

by the learned Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal, in Original

Application No.240/2024.

2. We have heard the learned AGP on behalf of the

Petitioners/ State and the learned Advocates on behalf of the

Respondents. The issue is as regards transfer of an employee in

view of the general elections considering the various circulars *2* 933wp8316o24

issued by the Election Commission of India, primarily the

circular dated 21.12.2023 and the circular dated 22.02.2024,

issued by the State Chief Election Commissioner addressed to

the Director General of Police (DGP), Maharashtra State.

3. It is undisputed that the person, who needs to be

transferred on account of the elections, should fall in the

following categories:-

a) If she/ he should be directly connected with the

elections.

b) If she/ he is posted in her/ his home district.

c) If she/ he has completed three years in that district

during the last four years or would be completing three

years on or before 30.06.2024.

4. The original Applicant was working as an Assistant

Police Inspector (Traffic), Chhawani Division, Chhatrapati

Sambhajinagar. He was not connected with the elections. Though

Chhatrapati Sambhajinar is his home town, he was not scheduled

to complete three years in the home district on 30.06.2024.

*3* 933wp8316o24

5. In the above backdrop, the learned Tribunal

concluded that the transfer order issued to the original Applicant

dated 26.02.2024, transferring him from CIDCO Traffic

Division, Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar to Nagpur City on the basis

of the proposal dated 23.02.2024, was bad and the same was

quashed and set aside.

6. We have perused the proposal forwarded by the

Administrative Officer from the office of the Police

Commissionerate, dated 23.02.2024. Those who were connected

with the elections and who were in the hometown are at Sr. Nos.

1 and 2 in the first chart. Those who completed four years or

three years in the hometown, are at Sr. Nos.1 to 5 in the second

chart. The Petitioner is at Sr. No.2 in the third chart, which

indicates his hometown. However, it is nowhere mentioned that

he has completed three years in his hometown.

7. Moreover, from the second chart, Smt. Gita

Motichand Bagwade, Shri Ashok Uttamrao Giri, Shri Avinash

Lakshminarayan Aghav and Shri Dilip Vithoba Gangurde,

challenged their transfers which were within the city, before the *4* 933wp8316o24

learned Tribunal. Their transfer orders have been quashed. They

had not joined the place of transfer. The Petitioner, as an obedient

employee, obeyed the transfer order and joined at Nagpur. His

transfer has also been quashed and set aside by the learned

Tribunal. Yet, he has not been brought back from Nagpur to

Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar. A Contempt Petition is pending.

8. In view of the above, we do not find that the learned

Tribunal has committed any error in quashing and setting aside

the transfer order. The impugned order of the learned Tribunal

cannot be termed as being perverse and erroneous. Merely

because a different view could be possible, would not mean that

the order should be branded as being perverse in the light of the

law laid down by the Honourable Supreme Court in Syed

Yakoob v/s K.S.Radhakrishnan, AIR 1964 SC 477 and Surya

Dev Rai v/s Ram Chander Rai, AIR 2003 SC 3044 : 2003 (6)

SCC 682.

9. This Writ Petition is, therefore, dismissed.

kps (Y. G. KHOBRAGADE, J.) (RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J.)

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter