Madhya Pradesh High Court
Smt. Prabha Kishori Kerketta vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 21 January, 2022
Author: Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari
1
The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
WP No. 1332 of 2022
(SMT. PRABHA KISHORI KERKETTA Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS)
Jabalpur, Dated : 21-01-2022
Heard through Video Conferencing.
Shri Rajesh Prasad Dubey, learned counsel for the petitioner.
Shri Sanjeev Kumar Singh, learned Panel Lawyer, for the respondent/State.
Heard on the question of admission.
The petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 6.1.2022 (Annexure P-3) issued by
the respondent no.3; whereby the petitioner has been directed to hand over the charge of
Warden, Kasturba Gandhi, Balika Vidhyalaya, Baliyari Waidhan, District Singrauli to
one Smt.Sangeeta Sahu (respondent no.5), who is junior to the petitioner, without
assigning any reasons.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that neither there was administrative
exigency or urgency to remove the petitioner from the additional charge during the mid
of academic session nor any complaint has been filed against the petitioner. The
petitioner is performing her duties honestly and sincerely since the year 2007. Therefore,
the impugned order is liable to be set aside.
On the other hand, learned counsel for the State submits that the petitioner has no
vested right over the additional charge of Warden, Kasturba Gandhi, Balika Vidhyalaya,
Baliyari Waidhan, District Singrauli, which is of temporary nature. There is no violation
of any legal or fundamental right of the petitioner. The service of the petitioner is also
not changed by withdrawing the additional charge. He further contended that the
petitioner has no right to ask for or stick to the additional charge.
The impugned order does not cause any financial loss or prejudice of any kind to
the petitioner. In support of his contention learned counsel for the State has relied upon
the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of State of Haryana Vs.S.M.Sharma and
others, reported in 1993 SCC Supp (3) 252.
Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
The impugned order is only an order withdrawing the additional charge.
Substantive post of the petitioner is Head Master Middle School. The petitioner was
neither appointed/promoted to the post of Warden, Kasturba Gandhi, Balika Vidhyalaya,
Baliyari Waidhan, District Singrauli nor he was reverted from the said post. He was only
holding the additional charge, which has been withdrawn.
This Court is of the considered view that the respondents are within the powers to
issue the impugned order withdrawing the additional charge from the petitioner.
In view of the aforesaid, this Court is not inclined to exercise the extraordinary
jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
Accordingly, the instant petition deserves to be and is hereby dismissed.
No order as to costs.
(S. A. DHARMADHIKARI)
JUDGE
TG /-
TRUPTI GUNJAL
2022.01.24 13:14:10
+05'30'
