Janak Lal vs State of Madhya Pradesh

This petition challenges the order dated 24.12.2016 Annexure P/1 whereby petitioner is transferred from Timarni, District Harda to Tikamgarh.

The admitted facts between the parties are that the petitioner was earlier transferred by order dated 17.7.2015 to the present place of posting and was relieved on 25.7.2015 Annexure P/2. The petitioner has not completed his normal tenure of two years at the present place of posting. In view of order dated 15.11.2016 Annexure P/3, this is also undisputed that petitioner is due for retirement in the month of October, 2017.

The petitioner has assailed the transfer order on twin grounds. Firstly, the order runs contrary to the judgment of Supreme Court in Prakash Singh and others vs. Union of India and others, 2006 (8) SCC 1 and circular of Government dated 14.2.2007 Annexure P/5. It

is submitted that petitioner is transferred before completion of minimum tenure of two years. Transfer order is passed without obtaining approval from Police Establishment Board. In addition, it is submitted that these conditions mentioned in clause 2 of the order dated 14.2.2007 Annexure P/5 are not attracted in the present case. Secondly, it is submitted that petitioner is due for retirement in October, 2007 and; therefore, no useful purpose would be served in transferring the petitioner at the december of his career.

Prayer is opposed by learned Panel Lawyer appearing for the respondents/State.

I have heard the learned counsel for the parties at length and perused the record.

A plain reading of return shows that the respondents have not taken pain to show as to why the judgment of Prakash Singh(Supra) and their own order dated 14.2.2007 will not apply in the present case. The return is very sketchy and does not deal with the specific point raised by the petitioner. Thus, there is no rebuttal to the pleadings of the petitioner that his transfer order is passed in flagrant violation of the judgment of Prakash Singh(Supra) and order Annexure P/5. Petitioner is also due for retirement in near future. For these cumulative reasons, the impugned order cannot sustain judicial scrutiny. Accordingly, transfer order Annexure P/1 to the extent it relates to the petitioner is set aside.

Petition is allowed.