Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Integrated with over 4 crore judgments and laws — designed for legal practitioners, researchers, students and institutions

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 2, Cited by 4]

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Rajneesh Kumar Gautam vs Union Of India on 26 June, 2013

                      W.P. No.10431/2013
           Rajneesh Kumar Gautam vs.  Union of India & Ors.



                                  1



26.06.2013
     Heard Shri Anil Khare, learned Senior Counsel
with Shri Som Mishra for the petitioner.
     The petitioner has filed this petition being
aggrieved by order dated 7.6.2013 (which it is
alleged has not been served upon the petitioner) by
which he has been transferred from Jabalpur to Kota
as well as order dated 12.6.2013, Annexure P-7, by
which he has been sought to be relieved.
     It is submitted by the learned counsel for the
petitioner that previously the petitioner had been
transferred by order dated 12.9.2012 against which
he had filed W.P No.15870/2012 in which an interim
order was granted and the said petition was
ultimately allowed on 14.5.2013 with liberty to the
respondents to issue fresh orders of transfer in case

administrative exigencies so require in terms of the transfer policy. It is submitted that thereafter the respondents have issued the impugned order dated 7.6.2013 and 12.6.2013 again transferring the petitioner from Jabalpur to Kota. It is stated that the petitioner had been posted at Jabalpur from Satna in the year 2012 and has now been further transferred to Kota within six months and, therefore, the petitioner is being subjected to frequent transfers in the mid session which is contrary to the policy of the respondents.

W.P. No.10431/2013

Rajneesh Kumar Gautam vs.  Union of India & Ors.

2

A Division Bench of this Court in R. S. Chaudhary vs. State of M.P. and Others, ILR [2007] MP 1329 has already held that in case transfer is alleged to be contrary to the policy, the appropriate remedy of the petitioner is to approach the authority themselves by filing a representation.

In view of the aforesaid, the petition filed by the petitioner is disposed of with a direction to the effect that in case the petitioner files a fresh representation before the respondent authorities within fifteen days alongwith a copy of the order passed today and a copy of the petition, the concerned authority shall consider and decide the same expeditiously in accordance with the transfer policy as far as possible preferably within a period of six weeks thereafter.

With the aforesaid direction, the petition, filed by the petitioner, stands disposed of.

C.C as per rules.

( R.S. JHA ) JUDGE mms/-