Santosh Kumar Pathak vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2021 Latest Caselaw 6321 MP

                                   1                              WP-21021-2021
        The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
                   WP-21021-2021
        (SANTOSH KUMAR PATHAK Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS)

1
Jabalpur, Dated : 01-10-2021
      Heard through Video Conferencing.
      Shri R.P Dubey, learned counsel for the petitioner.
      Shri Tapan Bathre, learned Panel Lawyer for the respondent/State.

Challenge being made to the order dated 29.08.2021 (Annexure P/1), whereby, the petitioner has been transferred from Govt. H.S Dhani to M.S

Balsota Block-Waidhan, District Singrauli.

It is submitted by the counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has been transferred at a distance about 200 kms from the present place of posting. Challenge to the transfer order is on the ground that his treatment still going on as he met with an accident, his parents are very old and they are depend upon the petitioner. It is further submitted that the petitioner has not been relieved till date and he has already preferred a detailed representation to the respondent-authorities which is still pending for consideration and directed to be decided expeditiously and till then the petitioner may be

permitted to continue at the present place of posting.

Per contra, counsel appearing for the State has opposed the prayer and submitted that the transfer order was on the administrative exigency. He has drawn attention of this Court to the judgments in the case of R.S .Chaudhary Vs. State of M.P. and others reported in ILR (2007) MP 1329

and submits no interim relief can be granted to the petitioner. He fairly submits

that as representation is preferred by the petitioner, the same will be considered and decided expeditiously.

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. In the facts and circumstances of the present case and also personal inconvenience is pointed out challenging in the transfer order which cannot be a ground in view of the judgments passed by the Division Bench in the case 2 WP-21021-2021 of R.S.Chaudhary (supra) and Mridul Kumar Sharma (supra). As far as the medial aliment is concerned, no medical emergency is pointed out or reflected from the document. In such circumstances, this petition is disposed of with a direction to the petitioner to file a fresh representation to the respondents no.3 and in case such a representation is filed the authorities are directed to dwell upon the same and pass a self contained speaking order

within a period of 15 days from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order and communicate the outcome to the petitioner.

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

With the aforesaid observations, this petition is disposed of. Certified copy as per rules.

(VISHAL MISHRA) JUDGE

Prar

Digitally signed by PRARTHANA SURYAVANSHI Date: 2021.10.02 12:30:05 +05'30'