Maan Singh Parmar vs State Of M.P And Others

01- The petitioner before this Court Sub Divisional Officer (Police), Sanwer, District Indore has filed present petition being aggrieved by order dated

27/05/2020 by which he has been transferred from District Ujjain to Police Headquarters Bhopal.

02- The first ground raised by the petitioner is that the petitioner has not completed two years of posting and therefore, in light of the judgment

delivered in the case of Prakash Singh & Others Vs. Union of India and Others reported in (2006) 8 SCC 1, the transfer order is bad in law.

03- The second ground raised by the petitioner is that the respondent No.3 while he was posted at CSP, Vijay Nagar, Indore was served with a

charge sheet and in those circumstances, he was shifted out and therefore, as the inquiry is still pending, there was no reason to post him at Indore.

The petitioner has further argued that his son was hospitalized from 05/08/2019 to 02/09/2019 and has undergone an operation and therefore, on

medical ground also he is entitled to continue at Indore.

04- It has been argued that without without instructions of the Police Establishment Board, the transfer order has been passed and therefore, it

deserves to be quashed. It has also been stated that there is no complaint against the petitioner and therefore, the transfer order dated 27/05/2020 be

quashed.

05- Learned Deputy Advocate General appearing on advance notice has informed this Court that the petitioner has been relieved from the present

place of posting and respondent No.3 has already joined at Indore. It has also been argued by learned Deputy Advocate General that the petitioner

was temporarily posted until further orders to Indore and it was not a regular transfer.

06- She has drawn the attention of this Court towards order dated 09/08/2018 and the same reveals that by an order dated 07/08/2018 the petitioner

was posted to Indore temporarily until further orders. She has stated that it was not a case of regular transfer and therefore, the petitioner is not

entitled for any benefit flowing out of the judgment delivered in the case of Prakash Singh (Supra).

07- She has also argued that the petitioner has completed almost two years tenure at Indore and therefore, otherwise also the transfer order has

rightly been passed keeping in view the administrative exigencies. In respect of the so called disciplinary action, the learned Deputy Advocate General

has informed this Court that the Departmental Enquiry instituted against the respondent No.3 has already been stayed by the High Court and

therefore, the petitioner does not get any benefit out of the same.

08- This Court has carefully gone through the writ petition and the order posting the petitioner to Indore dated 09/08/2018 and the same reveals that

the petitioner was posted temporarily until further orders at Indore. Otherwise also the petitioner has completed almost two years period at Indore and

therefore, the petitioner is not entitled for protection keeping in view the judgment delivered in the case of Prakash Singh (Supra).

09- The petitioner has also raised a ground in respect of illness and the operation which his son has undergone in the month of August, 2019. The

petitioner has not been transferred to some remote place. The petitioner is being transferred to Bhopal which is a State Capital having All India

Institute of Medical Science and number of medical colleges and therefore, by no stretch of imagination it can be said that the petitioner's son will not

be getting proper treatment at Bhopal.

10- In the considered opinion of this Court, no case is made out for interference keeping in view the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case. The

petitioner is a member of disciplinary force, he has completed almost 02 years of service at Indore and posting of an employee is a sole domain of the

employer. It is the employer who has to decide the place of posting of an employee keeping in view the administrative exigency as well as other

factors.

11- The so called Departmental Enquiry against the respondent No.3 has already been stayed as informed by learned Deputy Advocate General and

therefore, the State is the best Judge to issue transfer and posting orders. Normally interference is not made until and unless malafides are established

or there is violation of any statutory provisions / statutory guidelines. This Court does not find any reason to interfere with the transfer order.

Accordingly, the writ petition stands dismissed.

Certified copy as per rules.