Adhar Singh Kumhar vs Urban Administration And ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 1449 MP

1        HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH :
                    BENCH AT INDORE
                      WP No.8298/2021
          Adhar Singh Kumhar Vs. State of MP & Ors.

Indore: Dated:-09/04/2021:-

      Shri Peyush Jain, learned counsel for the petitioner.
      Ms. Archana Kher, learned Dy. A.G. for the State.
      Heard on admission.
      The petitioner has assailed the transfer order dated
23/03/2021

by contending (i) petitioner was subjected to frequent transfer. During last decade, petitioner is transferred on several occasions. (ii) As per document dated 14/08/12 (Annexure P/3), petitioner could not have been transferred to a Nagar Parisad.

(iii) Petitioner is due for retirement immediately after two years. Petitioner placed reliance on the order passed in WP No.1317/2021 (Ajay Kumar Chouhan vs. State of MP) decided on 27/01/2021.

Learned Dy. A.G. has opposed the prayer. She placed reliance on WP No.7114/2021 (Radheshyam Mandloi vs. State of MP) decided on 24/03/2021.

I have heard them at length on admission. The Apex Court in B. Varadha Rao vs. State of Karnataka & Ors., (1986) 4 SCC 131, opined that frequent transfer of low paid Class-III and Class-IV employees may uproot their family. The concept of frequent transfer cannot be invoked for highly paid senior officers like petitioner. The transfer order can be interfered with if it violates any statutory provision (not policy guidelines), proved to be malafide, passed by incompetent authority or changes service condition of an employee to his detriment.

No such ingredient is available in the present case.

      2         HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH :
                          BENCH AT INDORE
                            WP No.8298/2021

Adhar Singh Kumhar Vs. State of MP & Ors.

The petitioner continued to remain posted at Nagar Parisad. At present also he is posted in Nagar Parisad. Thus, no case is made out for interference by this Court. Even as per transfer policy, there is no impediment of transferring an employee, who has more than two years to serve the department.

So far reliance on the order of Ajay Kumar Chouhan is concerned, no finding is given by this Court and, therefore, this order is of no assistance to the petitioner.

As per judgment of Division Bench of this Court in R.S. Choudhary vs. State of MP (ILR 2007 MP 1329), I am only inclined to direct that if petitioner prefers a representation against transfer order before the Competent Authority, the said Authority shall consider and decide it by reasoned order within 15 days.

With the aforesaid, petition stands disposed off.

(SUJOY PAUL) JUDGE soumya

Digitally signed by SOUMYA RANJAN DALAI Date: 2021.04.09 17:53:32 +05'30'