Surya Prakash Dubey vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2022 Latest Caselaw 16347 MP

                                   1
 IN     THE       HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                        AT GWALIOR
                          BEFORE
        HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MILIND RAMESH PHADKE
                    ON THE 9 th OF DECEMBER, 2022
                   WRIT PETITION No. 28480 of 2022

BETWEEN:-
SURYA PRAKASH DUBEY S/O LATE SHRI KANHAIYALAL
DUBEY, AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS, OCCUPATION:
SERVICE DABRA DISTRICT GWALIOR JHABUA
DISTRICT JHABUA (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                              .....PETITIONER
(BY SHRI SIDHHARTH SHARMA - ADVOCATE )

AND
1.    THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH PRINCIPAL
      SECRETARY THROUGH PRINCIPAL SECRETARY
      DEPARTMENT OF URBAN ADMINISTRATION
      VALLABH BHAWAN (MADHYA PRADESH)

2.    COMMISSIONER DIRECTORATE OF URBAN
      ADMINISTRATION AND DEVELOPMENT, GOVT.
      OF MP. BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                           .....RESPONDENTS
(BY SHRI P.S. RAGHUVANSHI - GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE)

      This petition coming on for admission this day, th e court passed the
following:
                                    ORDER

Instant petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been preferred by the petitioner for issuance of direction to the respondents to decide the representation of the petitioner pending before respondent No.2 with regard to his transfer from Municipal Council Jhabua to any other Municipal Council near to his home District i.e. Gwalior.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the representation with

regard to his transfer to any other Municipal Council near to his home District is pending before the authorities, wherein it has been contended that he is suppose to retire within a period of nine months from today, he has an ailing mother aged 85 years, who is physically incapacitated and unable to even walk, his wife is currently posted at Govt. Girls Higher Secondary School, Dabra and as per the Clause 23 of Transfer Policy dated 24.06.2021, if the husband and wife both are working then, as far as possible, they may be posted at the same place. Learned counsel refers the judgment dated 16.07.2019 in W.A. No.1141/2019 (Ripudaman Singh Yadav Vs. State of M.P. and others), wherein it has been laid down that personal problems of the public servants should be considered

while passing the transfer order and every efforts should be made to save the family life of an employee. He further submits that the grievance of the petitioner would be redressed if the respondents/authorities are directed to decide pending representation of the petitioner annexure P/4 dated 25.11.2022 in the light of aforesaid averments and the judgment.

Learned Government Advocate for the respondents/State has no objection to the limited prayer made by counsel for the petitioner.

Heard.

Looking to the innocuous prayer made by the counsel for the petitioner but without commenting on the merits of the case, this petition is finally disposed of with a direction to respondent No.2 to to decide the pending representation of the petitioner dated 25.11.2022 Annexure P/4 sympathetically in the light of the judgment dated 16.07.2019 in W.A. No.1141/2019 (Ripudaman Singh Yadav Vs. State of M.P. and others) and Clause 23 of the Transfer Policy dated 24.06.2021, within a period of four weeks from the date

of receipt of certified copy of this order.

With the aforesaid, this petition stands disposed of.

(MILIND RAMESH PHADKE) JUDGE neetu NEETU SHASHANK 2022.12.09 17:19:33 +05'30'