Pradeep Jhariya vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2021 Latest Caselaw 8116 MP

                                     1                            WP-26467-2021
       The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
                WP No. 26467 of 2021
          (PRADEEP JHARIYA Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS)


Jabalpur, Dated : 02-12-2021
      Shri Mohan Sausarkar, learned counsel for the petitioner.

      Shri Ankit Agrawal, learned GA for the respondent/State.

The present petition is being filed for seeking the following relief:-

" (i) This Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue a writ in the nature of Certiorari and quash the impugned transfer

orders dared 26/11/2021 (Annexure-P/3) passed by Resp. No.1, the impugned order is also contrary in the light of order passed in the case of Hon'ble High Court, Hon'ble Supreme Court as well as Transfer Policy dated 24/06/2021 passed by the State of Madhya Pradesh.

(ii) Any other relief which this Hon'ble Court deemed fit and proper may kindly be granted to the petitioner alongwith cost of the litigation."

It is pointed out that the petitioner has been transferred vide impugned

order dated 26/11/2021, whereby the petitioner has been transferred from the post of Chief Municipal Officer, Mandla, District Mandla to the post of Assistant Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Jabalpur on administrative ground. Although Several grounds have been raised placing reliance upon the judgement passed by Full Bench of this Court in the case of Indore Nagar Karmachari Congress Vs. State of M.P 1998 (1) MPLJ 449, wherein, it is held that an employee of Municipal Council appointed under the provision of Municipalities Act 1961, cannot be transferred to another Municipal Corporation under the Municipalities Act, 1960.

Counsel appearing for the State on instructions has pointed out that the petitioner is working as C.M.O under Category of Class "C" therefore, he could have been transferred as an Assistant Commissioner. He has placed reliance upon the Rules under the Municipality Services Rules 1967.

2 WP-26467-2021 Scheduled as provided for the Chief Municipal Officer Class-III, wherein, 10 posts are being reserved as is reflected from the Schedule. In terms of the same Rules the petitioner who was working as a Class-III employees was considered and transferred and posting in the capacity of Assistant Commissioner Jabalpur, therefore, the transfer order has rightly been passed.

He has brought to the notice of this Court an order dated 01/12/2021 passed by Collector, District Mandla pointing out the fact that the petitioner has stood relieved on 29/11/2021 and the other person R.K Kurveti, Pariyojna Adhikari has been given the charge. Therefore, the petitioner has already stands relieved. Learned counsel for the State pointed out that another ground which has been taken by the petitioner that the transfer order is the violation of Clause 14 of the transfer policy as the concurrence of the Minister have not been taken prior to passing the impugned order. The judgment of the Division Bench of this Court in the case of R.S Choudhary and others V. State of M.P and others, ILR (2007) MP 1329 is clear on this issue that in case of violation of the any of the clauses of transfer policy the only remedy available to the petitioner is to get file a detailed representation for redressal of his grievances.

The law laid down by the Division Bench of this Court in the case of R.S Choudhary (Supra), wherein the Division Bench of this Court held as under:-

" Transfer Policy formulated by State is not enforceable as employee does not have a right and courts have limited jurisdiction to interfere in the order of transfer. Court can interfere in case of mandatory statutory rule or action is capricious, malicious, cavalier a n d fanciful. In case of violation of policy, proper remedy is to approach authorities by pointing out violation and authorities to deal with the same keeping in mind the policy guidelines".

Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, this Court deems it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition with a direction to the 3 WP-26467-2021 petitioner to file a fresh representation within seven days from today to the respondent no.1 and in turn the respondent no.1 is directed to dwell upon the same and pass a self contained speaking order and outcome of the same be communicated to the petitioner within 15 days from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order.

Needless to mention here that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case.

With the aforesaid observation, this petition stands disposed of. C.C. as per rules.

(VISHAL MISHRA) JUDGE

Prar

Digitally signed by PRARTHANA SURYAVANSHI Date:

2021.12.03 17:26:27 +05'30'