MEGHA MAURYA Vs. STATE OF M.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is second visit of the petitioner to this Court. The petitioner while assailing the order of transfer dtd. 10/6/2025 had filed a writ petition before this Court vide W.P. No.23087 of 2025. The said writ petition was disposed of by this Court vide order dtd. 30/6/2025 while directing respondent No. 2 therein to take decision on the representation submitted by the petitioner within a period of 30 days from the date of production of certified copy and till then the petitioner was granted interim protection. Now vide impugned order dtd. 17/9/2025 (Annexure P-2), the representation of the petitioner has been rejected, hence this petition has been filed by the petitioner.

(2.) The counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner has questioned the transfer order on the ground that she is a mother of a child aged about 3 years and recently she has given birth to another child. The petitioner was on maternity leave till 15/7/2025 and during currency of the said maternity leave, the petitioner was confronted with the transfer order dtd. 10/6/2025. It is contended that the representation of the petitioner has been turned down by the Authority in a highhanded manner without adverting to the grounds so taken recourse to by the petitioner. It is further contended that the posting of the petitioner at Katni is not affecting the interest of any other employee. The petitioner is also required to take care of her ailing mother also. All these aspects have not been taken into consideration by the Authority while rejecting the representation of the petitioner.

(3.) The counsel for the State submits that in pursuance of order passed by this Court, the Authority has considered and rejected the representation submitted by the petitioner. Now, it is for the petitioner to go and join at the place of transfer. The order of transfer having been passed in view of administrative exigency, no interference with the same is warranted.