Mahendra Uiekey vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2022 Latest Caselaw 13559 MP

                                                           1
                                        IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                     AT JABALPUR
                                                          BEFORE
                                            HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VISHAL MISHRA
                                                 ON THE 14th OF OCTOBER, 2022

                                             WRIT PETITION No. 23247 of 2022

                                   BETWEEN:-
                                   MAHENDRA UIEKEY S/O LATE SHUKHVEER
                                   UIEKEY, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, OCCUPATION:
                                   PANCHAYAT COORDINATOR OFFICER JANPAD
                                   PANCHAYAT MOHGAON, DISTRICT- MANDLA
                                   (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                      .....PETITIONER
                                   (BY SHRI U. K. VAIDHYA - ADVOCATE)

                                   AND
                           1.      THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH
                                   PRINCIPAL SECRETARY PANCHAYAT AND
                                   RURAL     DEVELOPMENT    DEPARTMENT
                                   MANTRALAYA VALLABH BHAWAN BHOPAL
                                   (MADHYA PRADESH)

                           2.      THE     DIRECTOR     CUM  COMMISSIONER
                                   PANCHAYAT          RAJ     DEPARTMENT,
                                   D I R EC TO R ATE ARERA HILLS,  MADHYA
                                   PRADESH BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)

                           3.      COLLECTOR   MANDLA DISTRICT          MANDLA
                                   (MADHYA PRADESH)

                           4.      JILA PANCHAYAT MANDLA THROUGH CHIEF
                                   EXECUTIVE     OFFICER JILA PANCHAYAT
                                   MANDLA (MADHYA PRADESH)

                           5.      JANPAD PANCHAYAT MOHGAON THROUGH ITS
                                   CHIEF    EXECUTIVE   OFFICER DISTRICT
                                   MANDLA (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                   .....RESPONDENTS
                                   (BY MS. SHWETA YADAV - GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE)

                                 This petition coming on for admission this day, th e court passed the
                           following:
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: SUSHEEL
KUMAR JHARIYA
Signing time: 10/14/2022
7:29:08 PM
                                                               2
                                                                ORDER

The present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed challenging the validity, legality and propriety of the order dated 05.10.2022 (Annexure P/1) passed by the respondent No.2, whereby the petitioner has been transferred from Janpad Panchayat Mohgaon, District Mandla to Jila Panchayat Lanji, District Balaghat (M.P.) on administrative grounds.

I t is pointed out that the impugned order has been passed against the transfer policy. His wife is suffering with ailment and study of his children will affect as the transfer has been made in mid academic sessions. It is submitted

that a representation (Annexure P/3) has been filed, which is pending consideration. An innocuous prayer is made to direct the respondents/authorities to consider and decide the pending representation expeditiously.

Per contra, counsel appearing for the State has opposed the prayer and submitted that the petitioner's transfer is on administrative grounds and is a service condition; therefore, the petitioner is duty bound to comply with the transfer order. He has placed reliance upon the judgment passed by the Division Bench of this Court in the case of R.S. Chaudhary and Others v. State of M.P. and Others, ILR (2007) MP 1329 and in the case of Mridul Kumar Sharma Vs. State of M.P. and others reported in ILR (2015) MP 2556 and has submitted that in violation of condition of transfer policy, the only remedy available to the petitioner is to get his representation decided at an early date.

Heard the learned counsels for the parties and perused the record. From the perusal of the record, it is seen that the petitioner has been Signature Not Verified Signed by: SUSHEEL KUMAR JHARIYA Signing time: 10/14/2022 7:29:08 PM

transferred from Janpad Panchayat Mohgaon, District Mandla to Jila Panchayat Lanji, District Balaghat (M.P.) on administrative grounds. A representation Annexure P/3 has already been filed to the authority mentioning the personal inconvenience.

The law is settled by the Division Bench of this Court with respect to transfers; wherein, the Division Bench in the case of R.S.Chaudhary Vs. State of M.P. and others reported in ILR (2007) MP 1329 has held as under :-

"Transfer Policy formulated by State is not enforceable as employee does not have a right and courts have limited jurisdiction to interfere in the order of transfer. Court can interfere in case of mandatory statutory rule or action is capricious, malicious, cavalier and fanciful. In case of violation of policy, proper remedy is to approach authorities by pointing out violation and authorities to deal with the same keeping in mind the policy guidelines."

The Division Bench of this Court in Mridul Kumar Sharma Vs. State of M.P. Reported in I.L.R (2015) MP 2556, has held as under :

"Transfer of a Government servant appointed to a particular cadre of transferable posts from one place to other is an incident of service. No Government servant or employee of public undertaking has legal right for being posted at any particular place. Transfer from one place to other is generally a condition of service and the employee has no choice in the matter. Transfer from one place to other is necessary in public interest and efficiency in the Public Administration. Whenever, a public servant is transferred he must comply with the order but if there be any genuine difficulty in proceeding on transfer it is open to him to make representation to the competent authority for stay, modification, or cancellation of the transfer order. If the order of transfer is not stayed, modified, or cancelled the concerned public servant must carry out the order of transfer. If he fails to proceed on transfer in compliance to the transfer order, he would expose himself to disciplinary action under the relevant Rules, as has happened in the instant case. The respondent lost his service as he refused to comply with the order of his transfer from one place to the other".

Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case and as admitted by the judgments passed by the Division Bench of this Court in the aforesaid cases, the only relief which can be extended to the petitioner is to direct the authorities to decide the representation of the petitioner at an early date.

Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case and the order Signature Not Verified Signed by: SUSHEEL KUMAR JHARIYA Signing time: 10/14/2022 7:29:08 PM

passed by the Division Bench in the aforesaid cases, this Court deems it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition directing the petitioner to file a certified copy of this order along with copy of representation before the respondent no.2, who in turn, is directed to dwell upon the same and pass a self contained speaking order and communicate the outcome to the petitioner within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of this order.

Needless to mention that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case.

Accordingly, the petition is disposed off. Certified copy as per rules.

(VISHAL MISHRA) JUDGE sj

Signature Not Verified Signed by: SUSHEEL KUMAR JHARIYA Signing time: 10/14/2022 7:29:08 PM