[Cites 0, Cited by 0]
Madhya Pradesh High Court
Anupama Sharma vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 6 February, 2026
Author: Maninder S. Bhatti
Bench: Maninder S. Bhatti
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:10805
1 WP-4172-2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MANINDER S. BHATTI
ON THE 6 th OF FEBRUARY, 2026
WRIT PETITION No. 4172 of 2026
ANUPAMA SHARMA
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Pramod Singh Tomar - Advocate for the petitioner.
Shri Girish Kekre - G.A. for the respondent/State.
ORDER
Learned counsel for the respondent/State is permitted to file a reply.
2. The counsel for the petitioner submits that by the impugned order
dated 28.01.2026, which has been brought on record along with the return as
Annexure R/1, the petitioner, who is working as an officiating Inspector,
District Police Force Sagar, has been transferred to District Force Niwari on
an administrative ground.
3. It is contended by the counsel for the petitioner that the children of
the petitioner are pursuing their studies. The final examinations are going on,
which is evident from Annexure P/3, and as per the time table, the last exam
will take place on 16.02.2026. Therefore, if the petitioner is compelled to
join at the place of transfer, the same would adversely affect the entire family
of the petitioner. The husband of the petitioner is working as an Assistant
Professor and is posted at Sagar only. It is further contended by the counsel
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:10805
2 WP-4172-2026
that a representation has been submitted by the petitioner vide Annexure P/5
dated 29.01.2026 before respondent No.2, but the same has not been
considered as yet. Therefore, counsel submits that respondent No.2 be
directed to take a decision on the petitioner's representation within the
stipulated period in accordance with the law and till then, the petitioner be
allowed to continue at his present place of posting.
4. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent/State submits that a
return has been filed and a perusal of the same reflects that the petitioner,
during most of her tenure, remained at Damoh and Sagar only, except for a
short period of seven months at Narsinghpur. Therefore, right from her
induction into services in the year 2010, most of the time, the petitioner has
remained at Damoh and Sagar. Thus, since the impugned order has been
issued in view of the administrative exigency, the same does not require any
interference. It is further contended by the counsel that the representation so
submitted by the petitioner before respondent No.2 shall be dealt with in
accordance with law.
5. Having considered the submissions advanced on behalf of the
petitioner and perusal of the record reflects that examinations of the children
of the petitioner are going on, and as per the time table which is produced on
record, the last exam is scheduled to take place on 16.02.2026. The petitioner
has already submitted a representation dated 29.01.2026, contained in
Annexure P/5, before respondent No.2 seeking cancellation of her transfer.
Hence, respondent No.2/Inspector General of Police, Sagar is directed to take
a decision on the petitioner's representation contained in Annexure P/5 dated
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:10805
3 WP-4172-2026
29.01.2026 within a period of 30 days from today by passing a well-reasoned
and speaking order in accordance with law.
6. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any view on the
merit of the case and respondent No.2 shall be at liberty to deal with the
representation of the petitioner, in his own wisdom, in accordance with law.
7. For a period of thirty days or till the decision by respondent No.2
on the representation (whichever is earlier), the petitioner shall be allowed to
continue at her present place of posting, i.e. District Police Force Sagar.
8. Shri Girish Kekre, G.A. for the respondent/State, undertakes to
communicate this order to the Inspector General of Police, Sagar.
9. A copy of this order be supplied to the petitioner as well as counsel
for the respondent/State. Petitioner also undertakes to communicate this
order to the Inspector General of Police, Sagar, within three working days.
10. With the aforesaid, the present writ petition stands disposed of.
(MANINDER S. BHATTI)
JUDGE
sp
