DILEEP KUMAR URANW Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner herein takes exception to the impugned order dtd. 24/11/2021 (Annexure P1) passed by the State Government/respondent No.1 by which his services have been transferred from Municipal Corporation, Raigarh to Nagar Panchayat, Chandrapur.

(2.) The petitioner herein is working as SubEngineer in Municipal Corporation, Raigarh and his parent Corporation is also Municipal Corporation, Raigarh. It is the case of the petitioner that his parent Corporation being Municipal Corporation, Raigarh, he cannot be transferred to Nagar Panchayat constituted under the Chhattisgarh Municipalities Act, 1961 (hereinafter called as 'the Act of 1961') and at the best, he can be transferred to any other Municipal Corporation on deputation under Sec. 58(5) of the Municipal Corporation Act, 1956 (hereinafter called as 'Act of 1956') and that too subject to the provisions contained in Sec. 58(6) of the Act of 1956 by which he would have lien on the post held in Parent Municipal Corporation and he will also be entitled for deputation allowance at such rate as the State Government may by general order specify and he will be governed by such other terms and conditions including disciplinary control as the State Government may, by general or special order specify and as such, in the instant case, the petitioner has not been transferred to any other Municipal Corporation by complying the provisions contained in sub-sec. (6) of Sec. 58 of the Act of 1956, but he has been transferred to Nagar Panchayat, Chandrapur, which is unsustainable and violative of the provisions contained in Sec. 58(5) and (6) of the Act of 1956 and therefore, the impugned order dtd. 24/11/2021 (Annexure P1) passed by respondent No.1 is liable to be set aside. Apart from that, it is also violative of transfer policy issued by the State Government as no approval has been obtained from coordination from the competent authority and as such, it is liable to be setaside.

(3.) Respondents No.1 and 2 have filed their return stating that transfer order has been passed on the ground of administrative exigency, it is strictly in accordance with law and it is not violative of the provisions contained in Sec. 58(5) and (6) of the Act of 1956 and as such, the writ petition is liable to be dismissed.