PANKAJ KUMAR SHARMA Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in pursuance to the impugned order dated 24.09.2020 (Annexure P/1), petitioner has submitted his joining at the transferred place but still he wants to prosecute the matter and wants order on merit, therefore, arguments heard and matter is being decided finally.

(2.) The basic contention as has been raised by learned counsel for the petitioner is that an executed order cannot be modified or cancelled. He relied upon a decision passed by this Court in the case of W.P. No. 17295/2017.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that petitioner submitted his joining at the transferred place and implemented the impugned order under protest, subject to final decision of this petition because respondents/authorities were compelling him to execute the order, therefore, to avoid any disciplinary action, he has complied the order.