Ramnaersh Rawat vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2023 Latest Caselaw 18609 MP

                                                       1
                            IN    THE    HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                               AT GWALIOR
                                                    BEFORE
                                  HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MILIND RAMESH PHADKE
                                           ON THE 6 th OF NOVEMBER, 2023
                                          WRIT PETITION No. 23258 of 2021

                           BETWEEN:-
                           RAMNAERSH RAWAT S/O BHAGWAN LAL, AGED 48
                           YEARS, OCCUPATION : PANCHAYAT SECRETARY, R/O
                           GRAM PANCHAYAT JAKIR JANPAD PANCHAYAT
                           VIJAYPUR, DISTRICT SHEOPUR (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                               .....PETITIONER
                           (BY SHRI NITIN AGRAWAL - ADVOCATE)

                           AND
                           1.    STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH
                                 PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF
                                 PANCHAYAT, VALLABH BHAWAN, BHOPAL
                                 (MADHYA PRADESH)

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

                           3.    CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, ZILA PANCHAYAT
                                 SHEOPUR (MADHYA PRADESH)

                           4.    CHIEF     EXECUTIVE       OFFICER, JANPAD
                                 PANCHAYAT VIJAYPUR    DISTRICT SHEOPUR
                                 (MADHYA PRADESH)

                           5.    CHIEF     EXECUTIVE     OFFICER, JANPAD
                                 PANCHAYAT    KARAHAL DISTRICT SHEOPUR
                                 (MADHYA PRADESH)

                           6.    SMT. SARLA JADON PANCHAYAT SECRETARY
                                 GRAM     PANCHAYAT   PANCHO,    JANPAD
                                 PANCHAYAT   VIJAYPUR  DISTRICT SHEOPUR
                                 (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                             .....RESPONDENTS
                           (SHRI DEEPAK KHOT - GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENTS
                           NO. 1 TO 5/STATE)
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: ABHISHEK
CHATURVEDI
Signing time: 07-11-2023
05:02:26 PM
                                                         2
                           (SHRI APS SISODIYA - ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NO. 6)

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

The present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been directed against the order dated 12.10.2021 (Annexure P-1) passed by respondent No. 3, whereby the order dated 31.08.2021, by which the petitioner was transferred from Gram Panchayat Jharer, Janpad Panchayat Karahal to Gram Panchayat Jhakher, Janpad Panchayat Vijaypur, was set aside and services of the petitioner were attached to Janpad Panchayat Vijaypur.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the impugned

transfer order is against the judgment of the Division Bench of this Court passed in the matter of Manmohan Sharma Vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh (Writ Appeal No.1249/2017, decided on 02.02.2018), whereby Hon'ble Division Bench has held that if the order of transfer is executed and if the employer intends to modify the same, it would be incumbent upon the competent authority to set aside the said transfer order only if there exists some administrative exigency as the said cancellation of the executed order would have direct bearing on the government exchequer, which is required to bear expenses of the transfer. However, through there is no administrative exigency existed except for the fact that the present respondent No. 6 on the recommendations of the concerned Minister was to be accommodated, therefore, the said order has been passed. It was further submitted that from bare perusal of the impugned order, it would be reflected that the said transfer order has been effected only on the directions of Incharge Minister and respondent No. 6 has been transferred in place of the present petitioner, which Signature Not Verified Signed by: ABHISHEK CHATURVEDI Signing time: 07-11-2023 05:02:26 PM

is dehors the transfer policy. It was further argued that till date, even after lapse of more than two years, no reply has been filed on behalf of the State and since the petitioner is enjoying the order of stay granted by this Court granted on 15.11.2021 and still working at Gram Panchayat Jhakher, Janpad Panchayat Vijaypur, hence, with efflux of time, the impugned order has lost its efficacy and deserves to be quashed.

3. Per contra, learned Government Advocate and learned counsel for the respondent No. 6 submitted that the impugned order does not suffers from any illegality or perversity as the same was in consonance with the transfer policy, wherein on recommendations made by the Incharge Minister, transfer could be effected and since the transfer of the petitioner earlier made was cancelled at the recommendations of the Incharge Minister, therefore, the stay order cannot be said to be bad in law. Learned Government Advocate, at this juncture, though candidly admitted that till date, no reply has been filed on behalf of the State and submits that since the petitioner is enjoying the stay of the impugned order since last two years, the petition may be disposed of with a direction to the respondent / State to consider the case of the petitioner afresh and pass necessary orders in that regard. Though this fact has been objected to by the respondent No. 6, but he also admits that for last two years, reply has not been filed by the State and the petitioner is enjoying the stay order and still working

on the post, where he was posted by way of transfer in the year 2021, which was cancelled.

4. After hearing the rival contentions, this Court finds that impugned order is dated 12.10.2021 and till date, the State has not filed its response. Transfer order appears to be at the instance of Incharge Minister and from bare perusal of the impugned order, it seems that there was no administrative Signature Not Verified Signed by: ABHISHEK CHATURVEDI Signing time: 07-11-2023 05:02:26 PM

exigency of shifting the petitioner from his present place of posting. In the light of the aforesaid factual matrix of the matter and with efflux of time, according to this Court, the impugned order has lost its efficacy, this Court deems it fit to quash the impugned order dated 12.10.2021 (Annexure P-1) with a liberty to the State to pass fresh orders in accordance with the transfer policy.

5. With aforesaid observations and directions, this petition stands disposed of finally.

(MILIND RAMESH PHADKE) JUDGE Abhi

Signature Not Verified Signed by: ABHISHEK CHATURVEDI Signing time: 07-11-2023 05:02:26 PM