Madhya Pradesh High Court
P.K. Singh vs Madhyanchal Gramin Bank Judgement ... on 9 October, 2013
1
Writ Petition No.17451/2013
P.K.Singh v. Madhyanchal Gramin Bank & another.
09/10/2013
Shri Gopi Chourasiya, learned counsel for the
petitioner.
Heard.
Order dated 14.09.2013 is being assailed by the
petitioner.
By said order, a representation preferred by the
petitioner, a Senior Manager (scale III cadre), against his
transfer from Satna to Tikamgarh has been rejected.
That, while posted as Senior Manager,
Madhyanchal Gramin Bank, Satna, the petitioner was
transferred to Madhyanchal Gramin Bank, Tikamgarh, as
Branch Manager, by order dated 10.05.2013.
Petitioner challenged the order vide writ petition
12859/2013 which was disposed of by order dated
05.08.2013 with the direction to respondents to take
decision on the representation and till then the impugned transfer was kept in abeyance.
The representation preferred by the petitioner came to be decided by order dated 14.09.2013 (which is being challenged vide this petition); whereby request for cancellation was rejected on the ground that the petitioner is on transferable post. That with the 2 Writ Petition No.17451/2013 P.K.Singh v. Madhyanchal Gramin Bank & another.
amalgamation of three Gramin Banks, the area of operation having increased necessitated the transfer of officers to facilitate the expansion of banking operation and that the transfer being in the administrative exigency.
The order has been challenged on the ground that the petitioner has been subjected to frequent transfer i.e. within one year of posting at Satna he is being transferred to another region. That it is the general policy of the Bank to retain an officer at a place for not less than three years. That the action of respondent suffers from vice of arbitrariness.
Considered the submissions.
It is not in dispute that on 01.12.2012 while working with Sharda Gramin Bank the petitioner was promoted and posted from Madhavgarh Satna to Sajjanpur, Satna. This placement, in the considered opinion of this Court, cannot be treated as transfer. It is also not in dispute that vide notification dated 01.11.2012 issued by the Central Government, three Gramin Banks including the Sharda Bank were amalgamated as a result whereof, the area operation of bank got expanded there requiring mobilization of 3 Writ Petition No.17451/2013 P.K.Singh v. Madhyanchal Gramin Bank & another.
manpower; more particularly the senior officers in the interest of banking service. Thus, administrative exigency warranted the transfer of senior officers like the petitioner. Furthermore, it is not the petitioner alone who has been picked up but there are other officers who are transferred with the petitioner. Thus, there is no instance of pick and choose also. Neither there is any iota of substance suggesting malafides or that the transfer is punitive, grounds on which generally interference is caused.
Therefore, this Court is of considered opinion that the transfer being in exigency of service, no interference is caused.
In the result the petition fails and is dismissed. No costs.
(SANJAY YADAV) JUDGE anand