Madhya Pradesh High Court
Smt. Deepmala Ahirwar vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 18 August, 2025
Author: Vijay Kumar Shukla
Bench: Vijay Kumar Shukla
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:22563
1 WP-32741-2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIJAY KUMAR SHUKLA
ON THE 18th OF AUGUST, 2025
WRIT PETITION No. 32741 of 2025
SMT. DEEPMALA AHIRWAR
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Kamlesh Mandloi, learned counsel for the petitioner.
Shri Sudarshan Joshi, learned counsel for the respondent/state.
ORDER
This is second round of the petitioner before this Court. The petitioner
was transferred by order dated 17.06.2025 from Govt. Primary School
Mahodiyapani, Block Bhagwanpura Distt. Khargone to Primary School,
Ukishan Flaya Block Bhagwanpura, Distt. Khargone.
The said order was challenged by the petitioner in WP No.25303/2025.
The said petition was disposed of with the following directions:-
"Having considered the rival submissions and on perusal of the
documents filed on record, this Court is inclined to dispose of this
petition with a direction to the petitioner to file a fresh
representation along with all relevant documents before the
competent authority/respondent No.3 within a period of one week
from today and if such a representation is filed by the petitioner,
the same shall be decided by the competent authority/respondent
No.3 by a speaking and reasoned order, in accordance with law
within afurther period of four weeks from the date of filing of the
representation.
6. Till the decision of representation of the petitioner, she shall be
permitted to continue at her present place of posting i.e. Govt.
Primary School, Mahodiyapani, Block Bhagwanpura Distt.
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:22563
2 WP-32741-2025
Khargone, in case no one else has been posted in her place."
In compliance to the said order, the petitioner submitted a
representation Annexure P/3 which has been rejected by the impugned order
dated 02.08.2025 after affording opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.
Learned counsel for the petitioner argued that the competent authority
has not considered that the petitioner is a lady and has been transferred to a
School which is 42 kms and the said place has no proper conveniences for
travel.
Upon perusal of the representation which has been submitted in
compliance to the order passed by this Court, no such ground has been raised
in the representation despite the direction of this Court to file a detailed and
comprehensive representation. The competent authority has decided the
representation by passing a reasoned and speaking order. The petitioner has
been transferred on administrative reason within the district itself. There is no
illegality in the order rejecting the representation.
The scope of interference in the transfer matter under Article 226 of
the Constitution of India is no longer res integra, as held by the Supreme
Court in the cases of Gujarat Electricity Board and another vs. Atmaram
Sungomal Poshani, (1989) 2 SCC 602; Union of India and others vs. S.L.
Abbas, AIR 1993 SC 2444 and the judgment passed by the Division Bench
of this Court in the case of R.S. Choudhary vs. State of M.P. and others,
2007(2) ILR MP Series 1329 , the transfer is an incidence of service and the
transfer order can only be interfered by the Courts of law if the transfer is
issued in violation of the statutory rules or the order suffers from malafide
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:22563
3 WP-32741-2025
exercise of power.
In view of the aforesaid, no case is made out for interference under
Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
Accordingly, the petition is hereby dismissed.
(VIJAY KUMAR SHUKLA)
JUDGE
Sourabh
