Madhya Pradesh High Court
Smt. Pratibha Dixit vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 18 September, 2017
WP-6278-2017
(SMT. PRATIBHA DIXIT Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
18-09-2017
Shri K.K. Shrivastava, learned counsel for the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been declared surplus on account of inclusion of name of Anil Awasthi, who has passed away on 14.02.2017. Therefore, without considering the fact that one of the faculty Anil Awasthi had passed away on 14.02.2017, the petitioner has been declared surplus. It is his contention that if the name of Anil Awasthi would have been deleted from the list of teachers working in the said school, then petitioner would not have been declared as surplus and she would not have been subjected to transfer.
In view of such submission, this petition is disposed of with a direction that the petitioner shall raise his grievance before the Collector in appeal as is provided under the policy dated 11.04.2017 within seven days from today and the Collector shall decide the same through speaking order within further period of 30 days. Till then, the parties shall maintain status quo as it exits today.
C.C. as per rules.
(VIVEK AGARWAL) JUDGE