Sundar Lal Saket vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2021 Latest Caselaw 5702 MP

                                                          1                             WP-19196-2021
                              The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
                                         WP-19196-2021
                                 (SUNDAR LAL SAKET Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS)


                      Jabalpur, Dated : 20-09-2021
                            Heard through Video Conferencing.

                            Shri Surendra Kumar Mishra, counsel for the petitioner.
                            Shri Ankit Agrawal, Government Advocate for the respondents/State.

Challenge being made to the transfer order dated 07.08.2021 (Annexure P -1); whereby the petitioner has been transferred from Singaudi, Block

Development Vijayraghavgarh, to Bahoriband.

It is submitted that the petitioner was initially appointed as Rural Agricultural Extension Officer, Block Development Budhar, District Shahdol on 06.07.1999. Thereafter, he was transferred on 10.04.2003 to Block Development, Rithi, District Katni. He was again transferred on 22.08.2005 to Singaudi, Block Development Vijayraghavgarh. The petitioner has performed his duties with utmost dedication and to the satisfaction of all concern. He is also holding the additional charge of Hatheda and Sijhara. He has already preferred a detailed representation to the respondents authorities but till date

the same has not been considered and decided. In such circumstances, he made an innocuous prayer to the respondents directing them to consider and decide the representation.

P er contra, State counsel has opposed the prayer stating that the transfer is on administrative exigencies. The representation submitted by the petitioner will be considered and decided expeditiously. He has relied upon the judgments of the Division Bench of this Court 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 v. State of M.P. and Others reported in ILR (2015) MP 2556. In such circumstances, no interim relief can be granted to the petitioner.

Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. Signature Not SAN Verified Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, this Court Digitally signed by TAJAMMUL HUSSAIN KHAN Date: 2021.09.21 11:49:09 IST 2 WP-19196-2021 deem it it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition with a direction to the petitioner to submit a fresh representation to the respondent no.3 supported by all the documents within a period of 7 days from today and in case such a representation is submitted, the respondent no.3 is directed to dwell upon the same and pass a self contained speaking order and communicate the outcome

to the petitioner within a period of 30 days 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. Certified copy as per rules.

                                                                             (VISHAL MISHRA)
                                                                                  JUDGE


                      taj




Signature
 SAN      Not
Verified

Digitally signed by
TAJAMMUL
HUSSAIN KHAN
Date: 2021.09.21
11:49:09 IST