Madhya Pradesh High Court
Dr. Tarachand Arya vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 15 November, 2022
Author: Gurpal Singh Ahluwalia
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE GURPAL SINGH AHLUWALIA
ON THE 15th OF NOVEMBER, 2022
WRIT PETITION No.26066 OF 2022
BETWEEN:-
DR. TARACHAND ARYA, S/O LATE
SHRI B.L. ARYA, AGED - 53 YEARS,
OCCUPATION - AYURVEDIC
MEDICAL OFFICER, PRESENTLY
POSTED AS INCHARGE DISTRICT
AYUSH OFFICER, R/O - GWALIOR,
DISTRICT GWALIOR (MADHYA
PRADESH).
........PETITIONERS
(BY SHRI YOGESH CHATURVEDI - ADVOCATE)
AND
1. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH,
THROUGH ITS PRINCIPAL
SECRETARY, AYUSH
DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF
MADHYA PRADESH, VALLABH
BHAVAN, BHOPAL, (MADHYA
PRADESH).
2. DEPUTY SECRETARY, STATE OF
MADHYA PRADESH, AYUSH
DEPARTMENT, BHOPAL (MADHYA
PRADESH).
3. COMMISSIONER/ DIRECTOR,
2
AYUSH DEPARTMENT, D-WING,
SATPUDA BHAWAN, BHOPAL
(MADHYA PRADESH).
4. DIVISIONAL AYUSH OFFICER,
DISTRICT GWALIOR (MADHYA
PRADESH).
........RESPONDENTS
(BY SHRI N.S. TOMAR - GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This petition coming on for hearing this day, the Court passed the
following:
ORDER
This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has
been filed seeking the following reliefs"-
"(i). That, the impugned transfer order dated
03.11.2022 Annexure P/1 passed by respondent
no.2, Deputy Secretary, Department of Ayush,
State of M.P. upto the extent of transferring and
posting the petitioner to Government Ayurvedic
Aushadhalaya, Gaurishahpur, District Rewa
(M.P.) may kindly be quashed and the
respondents may kindly be further directed to
post the petitioner either on the last place of
posting i.e. Shivpuri or on the other vacant places
available at District Gwalior, Guna or District
Sheopur, in the interest of justice.
(ii) Any other writ, order or direction as this Hon'ble
Court may deems fit in the facts and
circumstances of the case be granted to petitioner
doing justice in the matter. Costs be also
awarded."
2. Although the petitioner had raised several arguments in order to
show that the order under challenge is a product of malafide action, but
in view of the fact that his petition against the transfer order, which was
registered as Writ Petition No.17870/2021 was dismissed as infructuous
as well as his petition against the suspension order, which was registered
as Writ Petition No.14171/2022, was dismissed by order dated
28/6/2022, the petitioner cannot be permitted to re-agitate the same facts
in order to claim that he is a victim of malafide action of the respondents.
However, it is submitted by the counsel for the petitioner that by the
impugned order the petitioner has been transferred to Government
Ayurvedic Aushadhalaya, Gaurishahpur, District Rewa after the
revocation of his suspension order. It is submitted that the petitioner has
been transferred to a place which is 510 km. away from the present place
of posting. The petitioner is already facing departmental enquiry for the
charges on the basis of which the petitioner was placed under
suspension. The transfer of the petitioner to a distant place, which is 510
km. away from the present place of posting may result in denial of fair
opportunity to defend himself in the departmental enquiry, because it
would not be possible for the petitioner to frequently appear before the
Enquiry Officer. Under the facts and circumstances of the case, it is
submitted that the petitioner may be permitted to file a representation
against the order dated 3/11/2022, so that his valuable right to defend
himself in the departmental enquiry may be protected.
3. Per contra, the petition is vehemently opposed by the counsel for
the State. It is submitted that the petitioner was suspended by order dated
12/5/2022. Against which, the petitioner had filed Writ Petition
No.14171/2022, which was dismissed by order dated 28/6/2022. Now by
the impugned order, the suspension of the petitioner has been revoked
and he has been posted in Government Ayurvedic Aushadhalaya,
Gaurishahpur, District Rewa. The petitioner is an employee of the State
Government and, therefore, he can be posted anywhere in the entire State
of M.P. and he cannot suggest that he should be posted at a place of his
choice.
4. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
5. The petitioner is an employee of the State Government, therefore,
he can be transferred to any place within the State of M.P. and the
petitioner cannot make a complaint that he has been transferred to a
place which is 510 km. away from the present place of posting. However,
the petitioner may be right in saying that his posting to a distant place
may adversely affect his right of effective representation in the
departmental enquiry.
6. Since the petitioner has not made any representation, therefore,
this petition is dismissed with liberty to the petitioner to make a
representation pointing out the difficulties, which he may face because of
his posting in Government Ayurvedic Aushadhalaya, Gaurishahpur,
District Rewa. The liberty to make representation should not be
construed as a direction to allow the representation and the
representation shall be decided strictly in accordance with law without
getting influenced or prejudiced by this order. If the representation is
made, then the same shall be decided within a period of one month from
the date of receipt of representation alongwith certified copy of this
order.
7. In the light of the judgment passed by the Division Bench of this
Court in the case of Mridul Kumar Sharma Vs. State of MP and
others reported in ILR (2015) MP 2556, the prayer for stay of part of
the impugned order relating to posting of the petitioner is hereby
rejected.
(G.S. AHLUWALIA)
JUDGE
Arun*
ARUN KUMAR MISHRA
2022.11.17 19:21:08 +05'30'
