Prmanand Nagar vs State Of M.P And Others

On account of the prevailing conditions worldwide, brought about by the COVID 19 virus, heard through Video Conferencing to maintain social

distancing. The parties have been represented by their respective counsel through Video Conferencing.

In the instant petition, the petitioner has invoked writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging the order dated 22.05.2020

whereby the representation of the petitioner against the transfer order has been rejected.

Earlier the petitioner has visited this Court challenging the legality and validity of the transfer order dated 23.11.2019, whereby he was transferred

from Government Girls Higher Secondary School, Rajnagar to Government Girls Higher Secondary School, Bada Melhewra. The said order was

challenged in W.P. No. 26327/2019 which was disposed of by this Court vide order dated 19.12.2019 with a direction to decide the representation of

the petitioner within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of the certified copy of the order passed today. Thereafter, the petitioner submitted a

representation before the District Education Officer, District Chhatarpur and the said representation has been rejected by the impugned order dated

22.05.2020 by assigning reasons.

Learned counsel for the petitioner challenged the said order on the ground of the competency. He has filed a copy of the transfer policy dated

22.06.2019 (Annexure P-15) by additional documents and referred Clause-16 of the said policy to the extent that in case, if the transfer order is issued

by the District & Division level, the representation has to be decided by the Commissioner Public Instruction and if the order is passed at the level of

Commissioner Public Instruction, the representation will be decided by the State of M.P. This Court vide order dated 09.12.2019 disposed of the W.P.

No. 26327/2019 in the following terms:

Petitioner has challenged his transfer order dated 23.11.2019. Petitioner has been transferred from Govt. Girls Higher Secondary School, Rajnagar to Govt.

Girls Higher Secondary School, Bada Melhera. Distance between the two places is more than 90kms. Counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner's two

daughters are residing with him and studying in the same school. Petitioner is not surplus in the school and he is a regular teacher and he could not have been

transferred out. It is submitted by counsel for the petitioner that petitioner has preferred a representation which is pending for consideration. No other teacher

has been transferred in place of petitioner.

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, it is ordered that representation (Annexure-P/9) of petitioner be decided within a period of 30 days

from date of receipt of certified copy of the order passed today. Meanwhile, petitioner may be permitted to work at Govt. Girls Higher Secondary School,

Rajnagar.

With the aforesaid observations, writ petition stands disposed of.

Certified copy as per rules.

The said policy dated 22.06.2019 was not referred before the Court and this Court did not pass order directing any specific authority to decide the

representation. Admittedly, the petitioner made a representation to the District Education Officer, District Chhatarpur who passed the impugned order.

It is not disputed by the petitioner that he has not submitted any representation to the Commissioner Public Instruction so far.

Even otherwise, Law relating to scope of interference in the transfer matter is no longer res integra, as held by the Supreme Court in the cases of

Gujrat Electricity Board and another vs. Atmaram Sungomal Poshani, (1989) 2 SCC 60;2 Union of India and others vs. S.L. Abbas, AIR 1993 SC

2444 and the judgment passed by the Division Bench of this Court in the case of R.S.Choudhary vs. State of M.P. and others, 2007 (2) ILR MP

Series 1329, the transfer is an incidence of service and the transfer order can only be interfered by the Courts of law if the transfer is issued in

violation of the statutory rules or the order suffers from malafide exercise of power.

In the instant petition the petitioner could not establish any breach of statutory rule or a case of mala fide. The petitioner has failed to make out any

case warranting interference under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

Hence the writ petition being devoid of merit is dismissed.