Citation : 2023 Latest Caselaw 1009 MP
Judgement Date : 17 January, 2023
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
WP No. 23544 of 2022
(ARUN KUMAR MASRAM Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS)
Dated : 17-01-2023
Shri Ayush Jain - Advocate for the petitioner.
Shri Harpreet Singh Ruprah - Additional Advocate General for the
respondents-State.
Shri Aditya Veer Singh - Advocate for the proposed intervener.
Petitioner's contention is that his transfer is laced with malafide. It has
been affected at the behest of the proposed intervener Devideen Dubey, who was earlier working as President of a co-operative society. His tenure was over in 2017 but, on the basis of his muscle power and influence with the ruling party, he was interfering in the affairs of the said organization, as a result an inquiry was instituted against said Devideen Dubey. Shri Devideen Dubey claims himself to be a functionary of Bhartiya Janta Party, Madhya Pradesh, as is evident from Annexure P-7, letter head used by him on which he made a complaint against the petitioner to the Chief Minister of the State. Thereafter, another complaint was made by one Ram Bihari Chourasiya to the Chief
Minister of the State.
It is submitted that Inquiry Committee was constituted to conduct inquiry against said Devideen Dubey proposed intervener. It conducted inquiry and submitted its report. Being not satisfied with the inquiry report, petitioner had recommended for taking action against the members of the Inquiry Committee as is evident from his communication dated 20.05.2022 addressed to the Joint Signature Not Verified SAN
Commissioner, Co-operative Societies, Sagar. Thereafter, complaints were Digitally signed by PUSHPENDRA PATEL Date: 2023.01.18 19:38:53 IST
triggered so to get rid of him as petitioner was not allowing the proposed
intervener to have a field day without any interruption and continue his illegal activities, which was the subject matter of the inquiry.
Petitioner's contention is that there was so much of hurry and political pressure on the authorities to remove the petitioner that instead of giving charge to a suitable person, charge was given to a Co-operative Inspector, a post which is four places below in the hierarchy to an Assistant Commissioner and he could not have been given charge. Later on, when this fact was brought to the knowledge of the authorities then, they have given additional charge of the post of Assistant Commissioner, Co-operative Societies, Panna to the Assistant Commissioner, Damoh.
Reliance is placed on the judgment of Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court in Radheshyam Mandloi Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh and others, ILR 2021 MP 1489.
Shri Harpreet Singh Ruprah, in his turn, submits that transfer is purely administrative and there is no element of malafide.
After hearing learned counsel for the parties, it appears that since intervener at whose behest transfer order was made, has also filed an application for intervention, showing his direct involvement in the matter of transfer as can be seen from the letter head used by him that he appears to be a functionary of the ruling party. Therefore, it will be proper to call for the file in which proposal for transfer of the petitioner was dealt with.
Accordingly, learned Additional Advocate General is directed to produce the complete file in which proposal for transfer of the petitioner was dealt with
Signature Not Verified for perusal of this Court.
SAN
Digitally signed by PUSHPENDRA PATEL List on 23.01.2023.
Date: 2023.01.18 19:38:53 IST
Till then, interim order to continue.
(VIVEK AGARWAL) JUDGE
pp
Signature Not Verified SAN
Digitally signed by PUSHPENDRA PATEL Date: 2023.01.18 19:38:53 IST
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!