PRATAP SINGH MANDELIYA Vs. STATE OF M.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) SINCE the aforesaid petitions are interrelated and involve similar question of facts and law, on the joint request, matters are heard analogously and decided by this common order. W.P. No. 1191/2013

(2.) IN this petition, the petitioner, Chief Executive Officer, Janpad Panchayat, assailed the transfer order dated 18.02.2013. By this order it is directed that till further orders he is transferred and posted at Sanjay Gandhi Yuva Netratva Vikas Training Centre, Pachmadhi, Distt. Hoshangabad. This order is challenged by the petitioner on the ground that petitioner is subjected to frequent transfers. On 28.05.2012 he was posted at Pahadgarh. On 19.10.2012 he was posted at Sironj, from Sironj he was transferred to Sabalgarh on 06.11.2012 and from Sabalgarh he was transferred by the impugned order on 18.02.2013 to Pachmadhi.

(3.) THE next attack on the transfer order is on the ground of malafide. It is contended that the respondent No.2, Ex -MLA, on his letter head wrote a letter to the Principal Secretary Panchayat and Rural Development on 12.11.2012 requesting transfer of the petitioner to elsewhere and in lieu thereof, requested to continue respondent No.3 on current charge basis as CEO, Janpad Panchayat. It is contended that on the same date superior officer put a mark on the forehead of the same document Annexure P/8 that " As Jh vfu:) 'kekZ ;Fkkor CEO pktZ esa discussed put up immediately jgsaxs** - Shri Vivek Jain submits that even before petitioner could resume the charge, on 03.12.2012 a complain was made against him which has nothing to do with administrative exigency or public interest. He submits that respondents No.2 and 3 are in good relation and with a view to accommodate respondent No.3, petitioner was shunted. Criticizing the transfer order, it is contended that entire action of transfer is founded upon Annexure P/8. By drawing attention of this Court to Annexure P/5, it is contended that respondents decided to transfer the petitioner and then started searching the place where he could be posted. Attention is drawn to the relevant portion of notesheet dated 12.11.2012. Subsequent portion of said note sheet shows that information was desired from Joint Director Training Centre, Pachmadhi whether equivalent post is lying vacant because petitioner was proposed to be posted at said training Centre at Pachmadhi. Note sheet further shows that information is received from the training Centre of Pachmadhi that petitioner's salary can be drawn against the post of Lecturer / Reader. Said note sheet was approved and petitioner is transferred. Shri Jain contended that transfer is malicious is nature.