Madhya Pradesh High Court
Abdul Kareem Khan vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 16 September, 2021
Author: Anand Pathak
Bench: Anand Pathak
1
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
W.P.No.18985/2021
(Abdul Kareem Khan Vs. The State of M.P. & Others)
Gwalior Bench Dated: 16.09.2021
Shri Arjun Parihar, learned counsel for the petitioner.
Shri Sanjay Kumar Sharma, learned Government Advocate for
the respondents/State.
The instant petition is preferred under Article 226 of the Constitution of India being crestfallen by order dated 31-08-2021 (Annexure P/1) passed by respondent No.4 whereby the petitioner has been transferred from Government High School Pranpur to Government High School Parkana which is about 40 km.
It is submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner was initially appointed as Shikshakarmi Grade -II in the stream of Science. Thereafter, his services have been absorbed in the cadre of Samvida Shala Shiksha Grade-II and thereafter, again merged as Madhyamik Shikshak. Since, the date of his initial appointment, the petitioner is performing his duties with sincerity and devotion. The petitioner is suffering from disability of 45%. In the service role of the petitioner, the disability was recorded. Department of General Administration has formulated an policy of transfer dated 24.06.2021 wherein Clause 26 gives immunity to the disabled person with a further Clause 5 deals with power of transfer the same has been issued by the District Education Officer without concurrence of In-charge minister with a further to issue ignoring the disability of the petitioner which 2 HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH W.P.No.18985/2021 (Abdul Kareem Khan Vs. The State of M.P. & Others) causes serious prejudice, therefore, the order impugned order (Annexure P/1) passed by the respondent no.4 is illegal, arbitrary, malafide and the same is totally without jurisdiction. Being aggrieved with an order of transfer the petitioner has represented the matter before the authorities highlighting the fact that the petitioner is suffering from disability of 45% so also the petitioner is an alone son in his family over six sisters and having a liabilities of old age parents who is suffering from braim hemorrhage and paralysis. Thus, prayed for quashing of impugned order (Annexure P/1).
Learned counsel for the respondents/State opposed the submission on the ground that transfer is an incident of service and order of transfer does not violate any statutory rules. Thus, prayed for dismissal of writ petition.
Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents appended with the petition.
Transfer is an incident of service. No one much less petitioner has any vested right to be posted at a particular place of posting. It is well settled in law that employer is the best judge to organize its work force and it is also well settled in law that a transfer order cannot be subjected to judicial review unless and until same is found to be influenced by mala fide or arbitrary exercise of powers which petitioner fails to do so. Concept of equality as enshrined under Article 3 HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH W.P.No.18985/2021 (Abdul Kareem Khan Vs. The State of M.P. & Others) 14 and 16 of Constitution of India, has no application to the cases of transfers.
In view of the submission advanced by learned counsel for the parties, petitioner is directed to prefer a representation along with certified copy of this order raising all his grievances before competent authority/respondent within fifteen days from today. In turn, competent authority/respondent shall consider and decide the said representation so preferred as expeditiously as possible in accordance with law.
It is made clear that this Court has not expressed his opinion on the merits of the case.
Petition stands disposed of with above terms.
(Anand Pathak) Judge AK/-
ANAND KUMAR 2021.09.17 10:44:23 +05'30'