SANJEEV GUPTA Vs. STATE OF M.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed seeking the following reliefs:-

(2.) It is submitted by the counsel for the petitioner that by order dated 16/8/2016 he was transferred from the post of Audit, Nagar Palika Bhind to the post of Audit, Bhind, District Bhind. It is submitted that as the order was issued in administrative exigency, therefore, the order dated 16/8/2016 was complied with by the petitioner, however, he had made certain representations for cancellation of his transfer, which are still pending. Later on, he came to know that in fact his transfer was not in administrative exigency, but it was passed because of certain complaints against him and since no departmental enquiry was ever initiated against him and he was not given any opportunity to rebut the allegations made against him, therefore, the transfer was by way of punishment and thus, it is liable to be quashed. To buttress his contentions, the counsel for the petitioner has relied upon the note-sheets which were supplied to the petitioner under the Right to Information Act by covering letter dated 25/10/2017.

(3.) Per contra, it is submitted by the counsel for the State that the petition suffers form delay and latches, as even if the contentions made by the counsel for the petitioner are accepted, then it is clear that he had got the documents under the Right to Information Act along with covering letter dated 25/10/2017 and the present petition has been filed on 7/1/2019. Furthermore, the transfer order was issued in administrative exigency and there may be certain reasons for the same and merely because no departmental enquiry was initiated against the petitioner, therefore, it cannot be said that the transfer was by way of punishment.