Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Ramveer Singh Raghuvanshi vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 11 December, 2017

                               1                 W.P.No.21120/2017


    Ramveer Singh Raghuvanshi Vs. State of M.P. & Ors.
11.12.2017
      Shri MPS Raghuvanshi, learned counsel for the petitioner.
      Shri    B.M.   Patel,   learned   Govt.   Advocate    for   the
respondents/State.

With consent heard finally.

Present petition under Article 226 of Constitution of India has been preferred by the petitioner against the order dated 14- 07-2017 (Annexure P/1) passed by the Director, Panchayat Raj whereby the petitioner who was working as Panchayat Coordinator at Janpad Panchayat, Raghogarh District Guna has been transferred to Janpad Panchayat, Chanderi District Ashoknagar.

According to learned counsel for the petitioner, transfer order has been passed in the month of July, 2017 but the petitioner is working as Coordinator at Janpad Panchayat Guna and not at Raghogarh, therefore, impugned transfer order does not reflect correct place of posting. He referred the order dated 10-12-2015 (Annexure P/2) passed by the Chief Executive Officer, Zila Panchayat, Rajgarh. He pleaded in respect of mid session transfer and frequent transfer as petitioner has only consumed two years of service at the present place of posting.

Learned counsel for the respondents/State on the other hand, opposed the prayer made by the petitioner and prayed for dismissal of petition.

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents appended thereto.

From perusal of the order, it appears that petitioner has been transferred from Janpad Panchayat, Raghogarh District Guna to Janpad Panchayat, Chanderi District Ashoknagar which is not much far off place from his present place of posting. Any minor discrepancy or omission in the impugned order does not substantiates or re-enforces the arguments of petitioner.

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. Concept of equality as enshrined under Article 14 and 16 of Constitution of India, has no application to the cases of transfers. More so, so far as violation of transfer policy as alleged by the petitioner is concerned, same is guiding feature not statutory.

Therefore, minor omission here and there has no effective meaning. Particulars of petitioner would be treated as Coordinator Janpad Panchayat Guna. No error or violation of any fundamental right is apparent on record. Petition sans merits and is hereby dismissed.

                                                       (Anand Pathak)
Anil*                                                     Judge



                   ANIL KUMAR CHAURASIYA
                   2017.12.13 17:52:20 +05'30'