UDAY BHAN SINGH TOMAR Vs. STATE OF MP

JUDGEMENT

(1.) SINCE identical orders are called in question in these petitions, with consent, matters were analogously heard and decided by this common order.

(2.) IN these petitions, the petitioners have called in question legality, validity and propriety of the order dated 25.3.2015, whereby the Sub -Divisional Officer (SDO), Morena has given additional work to the petitioners. Criticizing this order, Shri Katare submits that the impugned order is contradictory in nature. On the one hand, it is mentioned that the petitioners are given additional work because of paucity of Patwaris, on the other hand the order treats such rationalisation as fresh posting. It is contended that the petitioners are neither surplus nor the place where they have been posted is lying vacant. In one of the matters, it is contended that the petitioner is subjected to frequent transfer.

(3.) I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.