Ramyash Upadhyay vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2021 Latest Caselaw 5002 MP

                                      1




             The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
                      Writ Petition No.14628 of 2021
         (Ramyash Upadhyay Vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh and others)

Jabalpur, Dated :03.09.2021
      Heard through Video Conferencing.

      Shri Shailendra Verma, learned counsel for the petitioner.

      Shri Praveen Dubey, learned counsel along with Ms. Shrishti

Kashyap, learned counsel for the respondent No.2.

This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been

filed challenging the order dated 29.07.2021 passed by the respondent

No.2 whereby the petitioner has been transferred from Warehousing &

Logistics Corporation, Maihar, District Satna to another District i.e. Katni.

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the

petitioner is a Class IV employee and cannot be subjected to transfer as

per the policy dated 24.06.2021 framed by the State Government. It is

submitted that nobody has been posted in place of the petitioner. It is

submitted that the mother of the petitioner is an old lady and suffers from

paralytic disease and there is no one to take care of his mother. The wife

of the petitioner is also suffering from T.B. and requires constant medical

attention.

Learned counsel appearing for the respondents has objected to the

prayer made by the petitioner on the ground that the transfer is a condition

of service and the petitioner has been transferred only at a distance of 66

Kms from the present place of posting. It has argued that on the request of

the petitioner, the petitioner has been transferred on the earlier occasion,

therefore, interference on the transfer order is not warranted.

Considering the judgment in the case of R.S. Chaudhary and

Others v. State of M.P. and Others, ILR (2007) MP 1329 and in the

case of Mridul Kumar Sharma Vs. State of M.P. and others reported in

ILR (2015) MP 2556, it is submitted that the representation submitted by

the petitioner will be considered and decided expeditiously.

Accordingly, this petition is disposed of with a direction to the

petitioner to re-submit a detailed representation to the respondent No.2

along with all the documents including the medical documents within a

period of ten days and in turn, the respondent No.2 is directed to dwell

upon the representation and pass a self contained speaking order in the

said representation within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of

certified copy of this order and till the decision on the representation, the

petitioner may be permitted to work in the present place of posting i.e.

Maihar, District Satna.

Let the outcome be communicated to the petitioner within the

stipulated time.

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) Judge

Digitally signed by ANINDYA SUNDAR MUKHOPADHYAY Date: 2021.09.06 17:02:49 +05'30'

AM.