Asha Bhalavi vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2022 Latest Caselaw 3159 MP

                               1

  IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR
                           BEFORE

                HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SHEEL NAGU

                              &

            HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MANINDER S. BHATTI

                   ON THE 07h OF MARCH, 2022

                WRITE APPEAL NO.205 OF 2022

Between:-
ASHA BHALAVI, D/O SHRI KRUSHNAJI BHALAVI,
AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, PRIMARY TEACHER AT
GOVT. PRIMARY SCHOOL, GENGKHOLI (DEVI),
BLOCK SAUSAR, DISTRICT- CHHINDWARA
(MADHYA PRADESH)


                                                      APPELLANT

(BY SHRI JAIDEEP SIRPURKAR, ADVOCATE)

AND

1. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH, THROUGH
PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, SCHOOL EDUCATION
DEPARTMENT, MANTRALAYA, VALLABH BHAVAN,
BHOPAL, DISTRICT-BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)


2. DIRECTORATE OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS,
MADHYA PRADESH, THROUGH COMMISSIONER
GAUTAM NAGAR, BHOPAL, DISTRICT-BHOPAL
(MADHYA PRADESH)


3. THE COLLECTOR, DISTRICT-CHHINDWARA
(MADHYA PRADESH)


4. DISTRICT EDUCATION OFFICER, SCHOOL
EDUCATION DEPARMTNET, R/O DISTRICT-
CHHINDWARA (MADHYA PRADESH)


5. SANKUL PRINCIPAL, GOVT. GIRLS HIGHER
SECONDARY SCHOOL, SAUSAR, DISTRICT-
CHHINDWARA (MADHYA PRADESH)


                                                  RESPONDENTS

(BY SHRI B.D. SINGH, GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE)
                                         2

             This appeal coming on for admission this day, Hon'ble Shri

Justice Maninder S. Bhatti passed the following:

                                JUDGMENT

The appellant is aggrieved by the order dated 18.02.2022 passed by

the learned Single Judge in Writ Petition No.3877/2022 and thus, has preferred

this writ appeal. The contention of the appellant is to the effect that she was

working as a Primary Teacher and was transferred vide order dated 30.08.2021

from Government Primary School, Gengkholi (Devi), Block Sausar, District-

Chhindwara (M.P.) to Government Primary School Markawada Mal Block

Pandhurna, District-Chhindwara (M.P.), on the ground of administrative

exigency. The appellant, challenged the transfer order by filing a writ petition

being W.P.No.19904/2021. The said writ petition was disposed of vide order

dated 22.10.2021, with a direction to the respondents therein, to consider and

decide the grievances of the petitioner and find out if she could be adjusted to

some other nearby school.

2. The representation pursuant to the aforesaid order dated

22.10.2021, was decided vide order dated 07.12.2021 whereby the order of

transfer of the appellant was maintained and accordingly, she was relieved on

07.12.2021 itself to join at the transferred place i.e. Government Primary

School, Markawada Mal Block Pandhurna, District-Chhindwara (M.P.).

3. It appears that thereafter appellant preferred another writ petition

which was registered as W.P.No.975/2022 praying for payment of salary to the

appellant/petitioner. The said writ petition was disposed of with direction to the

respondents to ensure release of salary to the appellant/petitioner within a

period of 15 days.

4. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that an order dated

25.11.2021 was issued by which, the representation moved by the

appellant/petitioner was rejected in which she had prayed for cancellation of her

transfer order and thus, the appellant/petitioner filed the petition before the

learned Single Judge assailing the order dated 25.11.2021 with further prayer to

consider the representation of the appellant/petitioner dated 27.10.2021.

5. However, the writ petition filed by the petitioner challenging the

order dated 25.11.2021 has now been dismissed by the learned Single Judge

leading to filing of present intra-court-appeal. The contention of the counsel for

the appellant is to the effect that the transfer order is against the transfer policy.

It is also the submission of the appellant that she being an office bearer of a

Union and therefore is immune from transfer, by virtue of Clause 33 of the

Transfer Policy.

6. We have considered the arguments advanced by the counsel for the

appellant and in our considered view, the present writ appeal has no merit.

7. It is trite that the transfer is an incident of service and therefore, the

same can only be interfered with when the same smacks of malafide or

arbitrariness. However, in the present case, the appellant is posted at the present

place for the last 25 years. It is needless to emphasise that none of the employee

has any right to insist to continue at any particular place of posting. It is the

prerogative of the employer to transfer an employee considering administrative

exigencies. Therefore, it's purely an administrative decision which is taken by

the employer. Until & unless the same is vitiated by malafide or is against any

statutory provisions, the same cannot be interfered with.

8. Thus, in our view, the learned Single Judge has not committed any

error in dismissing the writ petition and therefore the appeal deserves to be and

is accordingly dismissed without any order as to costs.

                 ( SHEEL NAGU)                          (MANINDER S. BHATTI )
                     JUDGE                                    JUDGE
         sp
SAVITRI PATEL
2022.03.11 12:52:25
+05'30'