Amjad Gani vs The State of Madhya Pradesh

Sujoy Paul, J.—Heard. Petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 26.8.2013, whereby on revocation of suspension he is reinstated elsewhere. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is entitled to be reinstated at the same place from where he was suspended. He relied on Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangthan and Others Vs. Dr. R.K. Shahstri and Another, in this regard.

Prayer is opposed by learned Deputy Government Advocate.

I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner.

The petitioner was placed under suspension by the order dated 6.3.2013 (Annexure P/2). The same authority while revoking the suspension posted the petitioner to Vijaypur whereas he was placed under suspension from Jora.

The judgment of Dr. R.K. Shastri (supra) is considered by this Court in a recent judgment reported in Dheer Singh Yadav Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh and Another, . This Court opined that the judgment in Dr. R.K. Shastri was with regard to the powers of the appellate authority under C.C.S. (CCA) Rules, 1965. The Division Bench in R.K. Shastri considered and decided the matter with regard to the powers of the appellate authority in deciding the appeal. In the present case, the controlling authority, who placed the petitioner under suspension, has revoked the suspension and posted him elsewhere. Thus, for the reasons stated in Dheer Singh Yadav (supra), the judgment of Dr. R.K. Shastri (supra) will not apply. No legal, constitutional or fundamental right of the petitioner is infringed. The petitioner does not have any lien on a place. He has a right only on substantive post. Petition is meritless and is hereby dismissed. No costs.