Madhya Pradesh High Court
Keshav Singh Ghuraiya vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 18 August, 2021
Author: Vishal Mishra
1
The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
WP-15429-2021
(KESHAV SINGH GHURAIYA Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS)
Gwalior, Dated :18.08.2021
Shri Alok Kumar Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner.
Shri Ajay Singh Raghuwanshi, learned Panel Lawyer, for the
respondent/State.
With the consent of the parties, the matter is heard.
(1) Challenging is being made to the transfer order dated 30.07.2021
passed by the respondent No.2 whereby petitioner is being transferred
from Zone Gwalior to Zone Rewa. The transfer has been made even
though petitioner is left only 11 months for his retirement. Petitioner is
working as Head Constable(Radio) and transfer to Rewa is going to
cause great hardships to him as he is going to retire on 31.07.2022
which reflects from Annexure P/2 at Sr. No.7. It is submitted that
Rewa is more than 400 Kms. The transfer of the petitioner is against
the transfer Policy dated 24.06.2021 of the State Govt. in which
Clause 22 reveals that not transferring the employee, whose period of
service left is one year or less. He has preferred a detailed
representation before the authorities on 02.08.2021 praying for
cancellation of his transfer which is marked as Annexure P/4.
(2) A specific question was put forth to the counsel that how long
the petitioner is working in present place of posting at Gwalior. It is
submitted by the counsel for the petitioner that petitioner is working
since the year 2008.
The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
WP-15429-2021
(KESHAV SINGH GHURAIYA Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS)
(3) Counsel for the petitioner has placed a reliance on an order
passed by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Writ Petition
No.15319/2021 passed on 17.08.2021 (Dr. Ramveer Singh
Raghuvanshi Vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh & Others) wherein in
similar facts and circumstances, the petition is disposed of directing the
authorities to consider the representation and till the petitioner was
permitted to continue at the present place of posting if not already
relieved.
(4) Per contra, counsel for the State has opposed the contentions
raised by the counsel for the petitioner and has argued that the transfer
being a condition of service and every Government employee is
required to comply with the transfer orders as and when required. It is
the domine of the Government to post an employee at the relevant
place as and when required. As far as challenge being made to the
Transfer Policy is concerned, the law is settled on the aforesaid issued
in the case of R.S.Chaudhary Vs. State of M.P I.L.R (2007) M.P. 1329 ,
whereby the Division Bench of this Court has clarified each and every
aspects pertaining to the transfer of Government employees in
violation of transfer policies and has directed that the only remedy that
can be available to the petitioner is to file a detailed representation to
the authorities and they will decide the same in accordance with law.
(5) He has further relied upon the judgment rendered by Division
The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
WP-15429-2021
(KESHAV SINGH GHURAIYA Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS)
Bench of this Court at Jabalpur in Mridul Kumar Sharma Vs. State of
M.P. Reported in I.L.R (2015) MP 2556, wherein the representation is
directed to be decided when the petitioner has complied with the
transfer order.
(6) Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the
petitioner is working since the year 2008 from Gwalior itself, no case
for interference is made out. However, looking to the fact that the
representation submitted by him before the authorities has not yet
considered and decided, the same be decided within a period of one
month from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. Needless
to say that this Court has not commented upon the merits of the case.
With the aforesaid observations, this petition stands disposed of.
(Vishal Mishra)
mani Judge
SUBASRI MANI
2021.08.24
12:08:06
-07'00'
