RANI SHIVHARE Vs. STATE OF M.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed against the order dated 08.03.2019 passed by respondent No. 2 thereby transferring the petitioner from Patwari Halka No. 100 Chaina, Tehsil Jaura to Patwari Halka No. 122, Tehsil Jaura on administrative ground.

(2.) It is submitted by the counsel for the petitioner that earlier by order dated 01.02.2017, she was transferred to Patwari Halka No. 100 Chaina, Tehsil Jaura from Patwari Halka No. 98, Ummedgarhwasi, Tahsil Jaura, thus, she has not completed even three years of her regular tenure at Chaina, therefore, the transfer of the petitioner is bad in the light of the transfer policy. It is further submitted that the respondent No. 3 has been wrongly posted in place of the petitioner, because he is still a probationer Patwari. Further, it is submitted by the counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has been transferred to a remote area situated in deep forest, which is full of criminal elements and, therefore, it would not be appropriate for the safety of the petitioner to go and work there. Further, the petitioner is a female employee having two children aged about 8 years and 6 years and it would be very difficult for the petitioner to work in such a remote area.

(3.) Per contra, it is submitted by the counsel for the respondents that so far as the allegation of accommodating the respondent No. 3 is concerned, the same is baseless and is a balled statement. It is further submitted that so far as the personal inconvenience of the petitioner is concerned, it is for the authorities to take care for the same and so far as the question of transfer of the petitioner prior to expiry of three years and her tenure at Chaina is concerned, it is submitted that violation of the transfer policy would not vitiate the transfer order.