Madhya Pradesh High Court
Raj Kapoor Singh Parihar vs State Of Madhya Pradesh on 2 November, 2020
Author: Gurpal Singh Ahluwalia
Bench: Gurpal Singh Ahluwalia
1
W.P. No.16180/2020
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
W.P. No.16180/2020
(RAJ KAPOOR SINGH PARIHAR Vs STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND
OTHERS)
Gwalior, dated: 02.11.2020
Shri R.K. Awasthi, Counsel for the petitioner.
Shri M.P.S. Raghuvanshi, Additional Advocate General for the
respondents/State.
Heard through video conferencing.
This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed seeking the following relief:
"(1) Impugned order dated 08.06.2020 passed by Respondent No.4 be quashed and set- aside;
(2) That, any other relief which this Hon'ble Court deemed fit and proper may also be awarded in favor of the petitioner."
It is the case of the petitioner that he is working on the post of Deputy Forest Ranger and by the impugned order dated 08.06.2020 (Annexure P/1), he has been transferred from Forest Division Datia to Forest Division Betul, which is 550 km away from his present place of posting. The petitioner is aged about 59 years and he is due for superannuation after sometime. It is further submitted that the petitioner is suffering from old age ailments and being an old person of aged about 59 years, he is more susceptible and vulnerable to the Covid-19 pandemic. It is further submitted that there is no administrative exigency warranting the transfer of the petitioner to a place, which is more than 500 km away from his present place of 2 W.P. No.16180/2020 positing. The mother of the petitioner is aged about 85 years and she is entirely dependent on the petitioner.
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner.
In the entire writ petition, the petitioner has not disclosed the date from which he is posted at the present place of posting, therefore, it is clear that the petitioner must have completed a considerable period of tenure in Datia. The petitioner was transferred by order dated 08.06.2020 and immediately thereafter, i.e. on 10.06.2020, the petitioner approached the medical practitioner with a complaint of stomach ache and nausea since morning. It appears that for no good reason the medical officer also advised a one month bed rest because there is nothing in the medical prescription to show that the petitioner was suffering from any serious ailment. Thereafter, the next medical prescription is dated 10.07.2020 and once again the petitioner was advised a one month bed rest. Again the petitioner was medically examined by the doctor on 10.08.2020 and without there being any serious ailment, again a one month bed rest was advised. Thereafter, on 10.09.2020 the petitioner was medically examined but again he was advised one month bed rest. As per prescription dated 10.09.2020, the petitioner was suffering from cold and cough whereas as per prescription dated 10.08.2020 the petitioner was suffering from limb pain. Therefore, it is clear that for no good reason the petitioner has been advised bed rest from the date of his transfer.
As per the transfer policy, generally an employee should not be 3 W.P. No.16180/2020 transferred if he is due for superannuation within a period of one year. It is not the case of the petitioner that he is due for superannuation within a period of one year. It is the contention of the counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has an old and infirm mother aged about 85 years and there is no other person in the family to look after her. However, no document has been filed to substantiate his contention. Further more, this Court while exercising power under Article 226 of the Constitution of India cannot act as an Appellate Authority and it is for the department to consider the personal difficulties of the transferred employee. Further the petitioner has not made any representation for cancellation of his transfer order. On the contrary, from the record it appears that on 08.06.2020 the petitioner was relieved from Datia and thereafter, the petitioner sent an application by registered post on 23.06.2020 to the Divisional Forest Officer, South Forest Division Betul (transferred placed) with an information that he would join immediately after recovering from medical ailment.
Transfer is an exigency of service and no one can claim that he should be posted at a particular place. No malafide has been alleged in the present petition. Accordingly, this Court is of the considered opinion that no case is made out warranting any interference.
The petition fails and is hereby dismissed.
(G.S. Ahluwalia) Judge Shanu SHANU RAIKWAR 2020.11.04 10:34:40 -08'00'