Narendra Singh Manjhi vs State of M.P.

Sujoy Paul, Judge

The petitioner has challenged the order dated 13.07.2012, whereby he is transferred from Akoda to Ater. It is challenged on the ground that petitioner was earlier directed to be relieved to the institution from where he was drawing salary. Accordingly, in obedience of that order dated 03.12.2009, the petitioner was directed to join the institution at S.A.F., Bhind by Annexure P-2. Thereafter, the petitioner was posted from Jawaharpura to Bhadakur vide Annexure P-3 and now he has been transferred to Ater. Another ground is that petitioner''s daughter is suffering from Tuberculosis and his ailing parents are dependent on him. Petitioner has already preferred representation (Annexure P-6) dated 26.07.2012. Transfer is a condition of service. It can be challenged only if it violates a statutory provision, proved to be a malafide, changes service conditions of an employee to his detriment or found to be issued by an incompetent authority. None of these grounds are available in the present petition.

On a specific question by the Bench, Shri Dwivedi, fairly, submits that the distance between two places i.e. Akoda to Ater is only 20 kms..

Considering the aforesaid, there is no ground available on which interference can be made by the writ Court. Merely because inconvenience is caused by the impugned transfer, no interference can be made.

A Division Bench of this Court in R.S. Chaudhary Vs. State of M.P. and others [(2007) ILR M.P. 1329] has held that transfer order will not get vitiated on violation of transfer guidelines and proper course for the employee in such cases is to prefer a representation and request the departmental authorities to cancel the same.

On the basis of aforesaid, I find no reason to interfere in this matter. However, the petitioner is at liberty to pursue his departmental representation. With the aforesaid observations, petition stands disposed of.