Monday, 18, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Vinayak Singh Tomar vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2023 Latest Caselaw 13752 MP

Citation : 2023 Latest Caselaw 13752 MP
Judgement Date : 22 August, 2023

Madhya Pradesh High Court
Vinayak Singh Tomar vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 22 August, 2023
Author: Milind Ramesh Phadke
                                                           1
                           IN    THE       HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                 AT GWALIOR
                                                   BEFORE
                                 HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MILIND RAMESH PHADKE
                                              ON THE 22 nd OF AUGUST, 2023
                                            WRIT PETITION No. 21061 of 2023

                          BETWEEN:-
                          VINAYAK SINGH TOMAR S/O SHRI ANIL KUMAR
                          TOMAR, AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS, OCCUPATION: GOVT.
                          SERVICE POSTED AS PATWRI WARD NO 2 NAWADA
                          BAGH TEHSIL BHIND (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                       .....PETITIONER
                          (BY SHRI YASH SHARMA - ADVOCATE)

                          AND
                          1.    THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH
                                PRINCIPAL SECRETARY VALLABH BHAWAN
                                BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)

                          2.    COLLECTOR BHIND, DISTRICT BHIND , (MADHYA
                                PRADESH)

                          3.    SUB DIVISIONAL OFFICER DISTRICT           BHIND ,
                                (MADHYA PRADESH)

                          4.    SHRI ARVIND SINGH BHADORIYA, MINISTER
                                DEPARTMENT OF OPERATIVE GOVERNMENT OF
                                MADHYA PRADESH (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                    .....RESPONDENTS
                          (BY SHRI S.S. KUSHWAH - GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE)

                                Th is petition coming on for hearing this day, th e court passed the
                          following:
                                                            ORDER

The present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been preferred challenging the transfer order dated 07.07.2023, whereby the petitioner has been transferred from Tehsil Bhind to Tehsil Lahar of District Signature Not Verified Signed by: NEETU SHASHANK Signing time: 23-Aug-23 5:17:56 PM

Bhind.

At the outset learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the transfer order has already been executed, therefore, he may be permitted to file fresh repres entation before the respondents/competent authority and the respondents/competent authority be directed to consider the representation of the petitioner and take appropriate decision on the said representation in the light of Mridul Kumar Sharma vs. State of M.P. reported in ILR (2015) MP 2556.

On the other hand, the innocuous prayer made by counsel for the petitioner is not opposed by learned Government Advocate.

Heard counsel for the parties and perused the record. Accordingly, in the light of the judgment passed by the Division Bench of this Court in the case of Mridul Kumar Sharma vs. State of M.P. reported i n ILR (2015) MP 2556, according to which the direction to decide the representation cannot be issued unless and until the employee joins at his transferred place, therefore, it is directed that in case if the petitioner after submitting his joining at the transferred place submits a supplementary representation along with certified copy of this order, then the said representation shall be considered by the respondents within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order without getting influenced or prejudiced by this order and the representation shall be decided strictly in accordance with law.

Needless to mention that the direction to decide the representation should not be construed as a direction to allow the representation and the representation shall be decided strictly in accordance with law.

Signature Not Verified With aforesaid observation, the petition is finally disposed off. Signed by: NEETU SHASHANK Signing time: 23-Aug-23 5:17:56 PM

(MILIND RAMESH PHADKE) JUDGE neetu

Signature Not Verified Signed by: NEETU SHASHANK Signing time: 23-Aug-23 5:17:56 PM

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter