Madhya Pradesh High Court
Krishna Kesav Rai Dixit vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 17 October, 2023
Author: Chief Justice
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE RAVI MALIMATH,
CHIEF JUSTICE
&
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VISHAL MISHRA
ON THE 17 th OF OCTOBER, 2023
WRIT APPEAL No. 1553 of 2023
BETWEEN:-
KRISHNA KESAV RAI DIXIT S/O SHRI RAMESH RAI
DIXIT, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, OCCUPATION: SERVICE
PRIMARY TEACHER GOVT PRIMARY SCHOOL GONTA,
DISTRICT REWA (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....APPELLANT
(BY SHRI N.S.CHAUHAN - ADVOCATE)
AND
1. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH
PRINCIPAL SECRETARY SCHOOL EDUCATION
DEPARTMENT VALLABH BHAWAN, BHOPAL
(MADHYA PRADESH)
2. THE COMMISSIONER, PUBLIC INSTRUCTION
GAUTAM NAGAR, BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)
3. THE JOINT DIRECTOR, PUBLIC INSTRUCTION
REWA DIVISION REWA (MADHYA PRADESH)
4. THE DISTRICT EDUCATION OFFICER, REWA
DISTRICT REWA (MADHYA PRADESH)
5. THE PRINCIPAL, GOVERNMENT HIGHER
SECONDARY SCHOOL SANKUL KENDRA
PANWAR, DISTRICT REWA (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(SHRI PIYUSH JAIN - GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NO.1
TO 5 AND SHRI A.K.BAJPAI - ADVOCATE FOR THE CAVEATOR)
This appeal coming on for admission this day, Hon'ble Shri Justice
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: RAVIKANT
KEWAT
Signing time: 10/20/2023
3:30:20 PM
2
Vishal Mishra passed the following:
ORDER
Assailing the order dated 05.09.2023 passed by the learned Single Judge
in disposing off the Writ Petition No.22404 of 2023, the writ petitioner is in
appeal.
2. The case of the appellant/petitioner was that the petitioner is holding the
post of primary teacher at Government Primary School, Gonta Dabhoura,
District - Rewa. By the impugned order dated 10.08.2023 (Annexure-P/2), the
petitioner has been transferred from Government Primary School Gonta,
Daboura, District- Rewa to Government Primary School Belhaiya, District-
Rewa. The petitioner has contended that after transferring the petitioner, the
school has become teachers-less. The appellant/petitioner submits that he has
filed representation before the concerning authority which is still pending. The
learned writ court without considering the aforesaid aspect has disposed off the
writ petition. Being aggrieved, the instant appeal has been filed.
3. It is pleaded by the petitioner that after transferring him to another school,
the school has become teacher-less and his representation with regard to the
same is still pending consideration. However, the learned writ court while
negativing the contentions of the petitioner and relying upon judgment of the
Division Bench of this Court in the case of Mridul Kumar Sharma vs State of
M.P. reported in ILR 2015 MP 2556 has disposed off the writ petition.
4. The State counsel submitted that the impugned order does not call for
interference. It is submitted that the transfer is an incidence of service and the
judicial scope of interference in the administrative functionality of transfer of
employees is extremely limited and should be invoked in rarest of rare cases. He
has prayed for dismissal of the appeal.
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: RAVIKANT
KEWAT
Signing time: 10/20/2023
3:30:20 PM
5. The counsel appearing for the appellant reiterated the submissions as were
made before the learned writ court
6. Heard learned counsels for the parties and perused the records.
7 . The law with respect to transfer is well settled in large number of cases by
the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the cases of Union of India and Ors Vs. S.L.
Abbas reported in AIR 1993 SC 2444, S.K. Nausad Rahaman and others
Vs. Union of India and others reported in 2022 (2) JLJ 147; Gujarat
Electricity Board and another Vs. Atmaram Sungomal Poshani reported in
(1989) 2 SCC 602 and in the case of State of U.P. and another Vs. Siya
Ram and another reported in (2004) 7 SCC 405 and also by the Division
Bench of this Court in the cases of R.S. Chaudhary and Others Vs. State of
M.P. and Others reported in ILR (2007) MP 1329 and Mridul Kumar
Sharma Vs. State of M.P. and others reported in ILR (2015) MP 2556.
Thus, no interference is called for.
8. The learned writ court has rightly considered all the aspects of the matter
and disposed off the writ petition. So far as the argument advanced by the
petitioner that the transfer of the petitioner is against the transfer policy is
concerned, the only remedy available to the petitioner is to prefer a
representation against the transfer order to the respondents/authorities in terms
of the judgment of the Division Bench of this Court in the case of R.S.
Chaudhary (supra) wherein the Division Bench of this Court 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
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: RAVIKANT
KEWAT
Signing time: 10/20/2023
3:30:20 PM
to approach authorities by pointing out violation and
authorities to deal with the same keeping in mind the
policy guidelines."
9. The Division Bench of this Court in the case of Mridul Kumar Sharma
(supra) has further directed for consideration of the representation in the event
when the employee complies with the transfer order and joins at the transferred
place of posting. The Division Bench 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."
10. In terms of the Division Bench judgment in the case of Mridul Kumar
Sharma (supra), the writ petitioner ought to have joined at the transferred place
and then his representation could be considered. Admittedly, the writ petitioner
has not joined at the transferred place till date. Therefore, no relief can be
granted to the appellant. Under these circumstances, the learned writ court has
rightly considered all the aspects of the case and has passed the impugned
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: RAVIKANT
KEWAT
Signing time: 10/20/2023
3:30:20 PM
order, which does not call for any interference in the present writ appeal.
11. The writ appeal sans merit and is accordingly dismissed. No order as to
costs.
(RAVI MALIMATH) (VISHAL MISHRA)
CHIEF JUSTICE JUDGE
rk.
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: RAVIKANT
KEWAT
Signing time: 10/20/2023
3:30:20 PM
