SANJAY UPADHYAY Vs. STATE OF M.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Since, the pleadings are complete and the learned counsel for the parties are ready to argue the matter finally as the matter relates to transfer, therefore, it is heard finally.

(2.) This petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging the legality, validity and propriety of the order dated 26. 09. 2019 (Annexure-P/17) whereby the petitioner has been directed to be transferred from District Raisen to District Sidhi. The order is assailed mainly on the ground that the same is illegal, arbitrary, mala fide and issued contrary to the provisions of the transfer policy. It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the order impugned is also in violation of the law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of (2013) 15 SCC 732 (T. S. R. Subramanian and Others Vs. Union of India and Others) and also in AIR 2019 SC 189 (Dr. Nagorao Shivaji Chavan Vs. Dr. Sunil Purushottam Bhamre and Others).

(3.) The basic contention put-forth by the learned counsel for the petitioner is that within a short span of 1 1/2 years, the petitioner is being transferred from District Raisen to District Sidhi. He submits that in the last three years, the petitioner has suffered almost eight transfer orders and as such, the present impugned order of transfer (Annexure-P/17) passed by the respondent No. 1 comes within the definition of frequent transfer which itself is arbitrary on the part of the respondents and, therefore, the said order deserves to be quashed.