SAU. SUNITA DAMODHARRAO DESHMUKH Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. By consent, heard both the sides for final disposal.

(2.) In the case reported as 2010 (2) Bom.C.R. 648 (Bombay High Court) (Aurangabad Bench) [Vyankatrao Ghalappa Savle v. Zilla Parishad and Ors.], this Court had occasion to consider the transfers of Class III and Class IV employees of Zilla Parishad. In that case, for inter district transfer, the rules given in Government Resolution (hereinafter referred to as 'G.R.' for short) dated 27.5.2000 were considered. The employees had argued in respect of their so called right to get benefit of couple convenience rule. In that matter also, this Court held that if the transfer is well within the relevant rules, it cannot be cancelled unless malafides are made out. In the case reported as [Yogesh Pratap Singh v. Government of Maharashtra and Ors.], this Court, while considering the challenge to transfer on couple convenience rule, made observation at para No. 5, which are relevant for present purpose, as under :-

(3.) In the present matters, most of the petitioners are claiming that the benefit of G.R. dated 15.5.2014 of Rural Development Department of the State Government is not given to them. In view of such contention, this G.R. and the other relevant G.Rs. are being discussed by this Court and sum and substance of the policy of the Government is quoted. In G.R. dated 15.5.2014, there are many parts. This Court is discussing only some parts and further, only those portions of the parts, which are relevant for the present purpose.