Madhya Pradesh High Court
Puja Ram Rathor vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 25 October, 2021
Author: Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari
Bench: Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari
1
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH,
BENCH AT GWALIOR
WP-21831-2021
(Puja Ram Rathore Vs. State of M.P. & Ors.)
Gwalior, Dated : 25/10/2021
Shri R.B.S. Tomar, learned counsel for the petitioner.
Shri R.P. Singh, learned Government Advocate for the
respondents/State.
Heard on the question of admission and interim relief. By this petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, challenge has been made to order dated 31/08/2021 (Annexure P/1), whereby petitioner who is a Panchayat Coordination Officer, has been transferred from Janpad Panchayat Ambah, District Morena (M.P.) to Janpad Panchayat Ater, District- Bhind (M.P.), on administrative ground.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a handicapped with 40% disability and he is having disabled certificate issued by the Government District Hospital, Morena (M.P.). It is further submitted that the impugned order of transfer is in blatant violation of clause 26 of transfer policy which specifically provides that such employees who have 40% disability or more than, should not be normally transferred till they themselves request for transfer on their own expenses. It is further submitted that there is no administrative exigency because respondent No.4- Ramesh Singh Kushwaha has been attached by the order of Commissioner Chambal Division, Morena and posted as Block Panchayat Officer at Janpad Panchayat Ater, District- 2
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH, BENCH AT GWALIOR WP-21831-2021 (Puja Ram Rathore Vs. State of M.P. & Ors.) Bhind (M.P.) and his salary is also being drawn from Janpad Panchayat, Ater, District -Bhind (M.P.). Thus, respondent No.4 is already working on the post of which the petitioner has been transferred vide impugned order. It is also submitted that the mother of the petitioner aged about 80 years is suffering from paralysis and there is no male member in the family of the petitioner to look after her except the petitioner. The petitioner has already submitted a representation before the competent authority, which is pending consideration. On these grounds, he prays for quashing the transfer order.
Per contra, learned Government Advocate for the State submits that no interference is warranted with the order of transfer as the same has been passed in administrative exigency and the policy is merely in the nature of guideline having no statutory force.
Having heard learned counsel for the parties, in the interests of justice, petitioner is directed to file a fresh representation with the competent Authority canvassing the grounds as marshalled in this petition along with all relevant documents together with certified copy of this order within Seven days of its receipt. If such a representation is filed, the Authority concerned shall decide the same by a self contained speaking order, in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of two weeks from the date of receiving such representation.
3
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH, BENCH AT GWALIOR WP-21831-2021 (Puja Ram Rathore Vs. State of M.P. & Ors.) Till the representation is decided, status quo as it exists today shall be maintained by both the parties.
It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case.
With the aforesaid, the petition stands disposed of. Certified copy/e-copy as per rules/directions.
(S.A. Dharmadhikari) Judge rahul Digitally signed by RAHUL SINGH PARIHAR DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH BENCH GWALIOR, ou=HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH BENCH GWALIOR, postalCode=474001, st=Madhya Pradesh, 2.5.4.20=eac942476567cd1b39b3da46068403462fdf82ab676d0cde4dee473fe77 953f5, pseudonym=68E0B84BAE73376CD071289B3D9FE728CE00D487, serialNumber=0275C4F803F94C47998BE5C534E21BDED910FD4AB9D159B55575 E814D05B2EED, cn=RAHUL SINGH PARIHAR Date: 2021.10.26 19:19:25 -07'00'