Ikrar Hussain vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2023 Latest Caselaw 13909 MP

                                                           1
                            IN    THE      HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                 AT INDORE
                                                      BEFORE
                                          HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIVEK RUSIA
                                               ON THE 24 th OF AUGUST, 2023
                                             WRIT PETITION No. 21342 of 2023

                           BETWEEN:-
                           IKRAR HUSSAIN S/O SHRI SADULLA SHAH, AGED
                           ABOUT 51 YEARS, OCCUPATION: BLO AND PRATHMIK
                           SIKSHAK HOUSE NO. 5 WARD NO. 18 BAZAAR COLONY
                           GANDHISAGAR TEHSIL BHANPURA DISTT. MANDSAUR
                           (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                       .....PETITIONER
                           (BY SHRI RAJEEV KUMAR JAIN, ADVOCATE)

                           AND
                           1.    THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH PRINCIPAL
                                 SECRETARY SCHOOL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT
                                 VALLABH BHAWAN BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)

                           2.    THE    COLLECTOR COLLECTOR             OFFICER,
                                 MANDSAUR (MADHYA PRADESH)

                           3.    DISTRICT EDUCATION         OFFICER MANDSAUR
                                 (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                    .....RESPONDENTS
                           (BY SHRI PRADYUMNA KIBE, PANEL LAWYER)

                                 This petition coming on for admission this day, th e court passed the
                           following:
                                                            ORDER

The petitioner has filed the present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India being aggrieved by the order dated 10.08.2023, whereby he has been transferred from Government Boys Primary School, Gandhisagar, District-Mandsaur to Government Girls Primary School, Amlawad on

Signature Not Verified Signed by: VARSHA SINGH Signing time: 25-08-2023 12:36:06

administrative ground.

02. The facts of the case reveal that the petitioner is working as Primary Teacher. He is assailing the transfer order on the ground that his aged mother and he himself suffering from illness. Till date, no one has been posted in his place in Government Boys Primary School, Gandhisagar, District-Mandsaur, hence, he is required in this school. The distance between two places is 160 Kms.

03. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been engaged in election duties as B.L.O., therefore, he is not liable to be transferred.

04. The impugned order is not liable to be interfered with on the grounds

raised by the petitioner. The job of B.L.O. is to prepare voter lists which is an ongoing process and on the transferred place also he can be engaged as B.L.O. Even otherwise, there is no violation of any clause of the transfer policy, therefore, only on the ground of personal inconvenience, the transfer order is not liable to be interfered with by the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

05. In view of (2004) 12 SCC 390 (Medley Minerals India Limited v/s State of Orissa & Others), (1995) 2 SCC 57 (State of Punjab & Others v/s Chaman Lal Goyal), (2015) 1 SCC 642 (Rajendra Kumar Agrawal v/s State of Uttar Pradesh & Others), (2020) 3 SCC 86 (Rajneesh Khajuria v/s Wockhardy Limited & Another) and judgment of this Court in 2011 (3) M.P.H.T. 479 (Bhagwat Singh Verma v/s The State of Madhya Pradesh & Others), the allegations of malafide cannot be entertained.

06. The transfer order can be interfered with if it violates any statutory provision (not policy guideline), proved to be malafide, passed by incompetent authority or changes service conditions of an employee to his detriment. No Signature Not Verified Signed by: VARSHA SINGH Signing time: 25-08-2023 12:36:06

such ingredients are available in the petition.

07. In view of the above, Writ Petition stands dismissed

(VIVEK RUSIA) JUDGE VS

Signature Not Verified Signed by: VARSHA SINGH Signing time: 25-08-2023 12:36:06