Satish Kumar Tripathi vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2021 Latest Caselaw 5453 MP

                                   1                              WP-18535-2021
        The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
                   WP-18535-2021
        (SATISH KUMAR TRIPATHI Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS)

1
Jabalpur, Dated : 15-09-2021
      Heard through Video Conferencing.
      Shri Vidhya Prasad, learned counsel for the petitioner.
      Shri M.M Verma, learned counsel for the Caveator.
      Shri Shivam Hazari, learned PL for the respondent/State.

In the instant petition, the petitioner is challenging the impugned transfer

order dated 31/08/2021 whereby the petitioner has been transferred from Damodargarh, Janpad Panchayat Hanumana to Gram Panchayat Bagaiha, Janpad Panchayat Hanumana.

It is submitted that the petitioner has been subjected to frequent transfer as vide order dated 05/12/2020. He was recently being transferred at the present place of posting. Now, by the impugned order again he has been transferred, the transfer order is in violation of Clause 17 of the transfer policy. He has submitted that the representation to the respondent authorities which is pending consideration and not decided till date. In such

circumstances an innocuous prayer has been made to get the representation decided within stipulated time frame in the light of the order by coordinate Bench of this Court passed in W.P. No. 14717/2020 dated 15/10/2020 wherein in similar circumstances, interim relief was granted by disposing of the writ petition. He prays for similar relief to be extended.

Per contra, learned counsel for the State has opposed the prayer stating that transfer is the condition of service. The transfer order has been on administrative ground. He has relied upon the judgment passed by 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 wherein, in similar circumstances, the guidelines for consideration of matters of transfer has been taken into account. He has prayed for dismissed of the petition, however no objection is 2 WP-18535-2021 regarding decision on representation within a stipulated time frame.

Shri M.M Verma, learned counsel for the Caveator has point out the fact that the employee has been placed at serial No. 14 of the transfer list dated 31/08/202. No one has been transferred in place of the petitioner and he has joined the transferred place. The present petitioner has already been relieved from the aforesaid place. In such circumstances, no interim relief

shall be granted to the petitioner.

I n the facts and circumstances of the case, this court deems it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition with the direction to the petitioner to file a fresh representation within seven days from today to the respondent no. 4- authority and in turn the respondent no. 4 is directed to dwell upon the representation and pass self contained speaking order and outcome of the same be communicated to the petitioner within 30 days from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order. In such circumstances, no interim relief shall be granted to the petitioner.

Needless to say that this court has not expressed any opinion on merits of the case.

The petition stands disposed of.

VISHAL MISHRA) JUDGE

Prar

Digitally signed by PRARTHANA SURYAVANSHI Date: 2021.09.16 14:47:07 +05'30'