B.L. Sahu vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2022 Latest Caselaw 1579 MP

                                                       1
                           IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR
                                                     BEFORE
                                       HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIVEK AGARWAL
                                             ON THE 3rd OF FEBRUARY, 2022

                                        WRIT PETITION No. 17901 of 2019

                               Between:-
                               B.L. SAHU S/O SHYAM LAL SAHU, AGED
                               ABOUT 51 YEARS, OCCUPATION: MIDDLE
                               TEACHER SENIOR BASIC MIDDLE SCHOOL
                               SHAHPURA     SANKUL     GOVERNMENT
                               EXCELLENCE HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL
                               SHAHPURA DINDORI SANKUL GOVERNMENT
                               EXCELLENCE HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL
                               SHAHPURA DINDORI (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                  .....PETITIONER
                               (BY SHRI AMIT KUMAR CHATURVEDI, ADVOCATE)

                               AND

                      1.       THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THR.
                               PRINCIPAL  TRIBAL WELFARE   DEPT
                               VALLABH BHAWAN BHOPAL (MADHYA
                               PRADESH)

                      2.       THE           COMMISSIONER,       TRIBAL
                               D E V E L O P M E N T , SATPURA BHAWAN,
                               BHOPAL, DISTRICT BHOPAL M.P. (MADHYA
                               PRADESH)

                      3.       THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, SCHEDULE
                               CASTE AND SCHEDULE TRIBE, WELFARE
                               D E P A R T M E N T , JABALPUR, DIVISION,
                               JABALPUR, M.P. (MADHYA PRADESH)

                      4.       THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, TRIBAL
                               WELFARE DEPARTMENT DINDORI, DISTRICT
                               DINDORI, M.P. (MADHYA PRADESH)

                      5.       SHRI RAJESH GUPTA, GENERAL SECRETARY,
                               MADHYAPRADESH, CONGRESS COMMITTEE,
                               R/O WARD NO.3, MANAS BHAWAN WARD,
                               SHAHPURA, POST AND TEHSIL DISTRICT
                               DINDORI, M.P. (MADHYA PRADESH)

                      6.       THE      PRINCIPAL,      GOVERNMENT
                               EXCELLENCE, HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL,
                               SHAHPURA,   DISTRICT   DINDORI,  M.P.
                               (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                .....RESPONDENTS
                               (BY SHRI GAURAV TIWARI, PANEL LAWYER)
                                           (Heard through Video Conferencing)

Signature Not                This petition has come up for admission and interim relief this day,
 SAN
Verified

Digitally signed by
AMIT JAIN
Date: 2022.02.03
19:19:14 IST
                                   2
the court passed the following:
                                  ORDER

Petitioner has filed this petition challenging his transfer order dated 8.8.2019 (Annexure-P/2), whose name appears at Serial No.2, has been transferred from Government Senior Basic Middle School, Shahpura, District Dindori to Government High School Kauajhir,

District Shahpura, District Dindori.

The aforesaid order was stayed by a Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 13.9.2019. State has filed stereotyped return without justifying the transfer. Placing reliance on the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Mohammad Masood Ahmad versus State of Uttar Pradesh & Others (2007) 8 SCC 150 wherein it is held that transfer on recommendation of an M.L.A did not vitiate the transfer order, learned Panel Lawyer for the respondent/State submits that no interference is required in the impugned order of transfer.

However, the fact of the matter is that the petitioner has enjoyed the stay on his transfer for a period of over two years and now the authorities are required to reevaluate administrative exigency in the matter and, therefore, the interim order dated 13.9.2019 is made absolute. The impugned order of transfer qua the present petitioner is quashed. Liberty is reserved in favour of the respondents that in case, exigency of administration so requires, they may pass fresh orders.

In above terms, this writ petition stands disposed of.

(VIVEK AGARWAL) JUDGE amit