Rajendra Dubey vs Manas Gupta And Ors

P. R. Ramachandra Menon, CJ

Grievance is against the verdict passed by the learned Single Judge whereby the representation preferred by the writ Petitioner/Respondent No. 4

herein was directed to be considered, simultaneously granting stay with regard to the transfer ordered by the Competent Authority, despite the fact

that the Appellant had already been relieved from the post and had joined at the transferred place, which was never brought to the notice of the

learned Single Judge.

The sequence of events is as follows:

On 22.08.2019, the transfer order was passed in respect of the Appellant herein to take charge as Sub Divisional Officer at Block Batauli, District

Surguja (C.G.).

The 3rd Respondent herein was virtually serving at the same place, however, with charge of the Sub Divisional Officer. The Appellant reported in a

new station on 03.09.2019 after reliving him from the post at Block Rajpur, District Balrampur (C.G.) and he assumed the office 06.09.2019. It was

later that, the writ petition challenging the order passed by the 3 rd Respondent was considered by the learned Single Judge who passed the final

verdict on 12.09.2019, whereby the representation sought to be preferred by the writ petitioner was directed to be considered in the manner specified

therein, however, granting stay of the transfer till such time. By virtue of the said order, it is stated that the Appellant was made to quit the post and he

is neither here, nor there, because of the course and events pursued. It is also made a mention that the factum of joining service by the Appellant at

the transferred place on 06.09.2019 was never brought to the notice of learned Single Judge, but for which the order of stay would not have been

there.

After taking note of the sequence of events, we passed an order on 18.10.2019 in the following terms:

Learned counsel representing the State submits that submission made learned counsel for the appellant is right insofar as, pursuant to transfer order

the appellant had taken charge as 'In-charge Sub-Divisional Officer' at Batauli, District Surguja (CG) on 06.09.2019, but this fact was omitted to be

brought to the notice of the learned Single Judge when the writ petition preferred by respondent No. 1 herein was finalized directing the respondent

No. 2 herein to consider and decide representation of respondent No. 1 herein and also granting the interim relief of staying the transfer order of

respondent No. 1 herein till the final decision of representation. Pursuant to the said verdict, the appellant herein was ousted on 28.09.2019 and

because of the said mistake, learned State Counsel submits that proper proceedings will be pursued to bring back the position as it was and to have the

matter settled accordingly.

Further instructions were sought to be obtained. We heard the learned counsel for the Appellant, the learned counsel appearing for the 1 st

Respondent and Shri Gagan Tiwari, the learned counsel representing the State.

It is brought to our notice by the learned counsel for the State that corrective measures have already been taken and the mistake occurred has been

rectified by passing a proper order dated 22.10.2019, whereby the order which was under challenge stands recalled and the position as it was

prevailing earlier has been restored. The transfer order passed by the Respondent No. 2 itself has been cancelled. The order reads as follows:

, , ,

// //

◌ .

,

,

2

2/1

0

/

2

019

1

-

5

5/

22

-

1

/2

0

19

:

1

-

55

/

22

-

1/

2

0

1

9

,

2

2

.

08

.20

1

9

◌- 2 7 , , , ,

, ,

2 / . , , ◌ , ... (

). ◌ ◌ ... , - ,

7204/201

9

,

1

2

.0

9

.

20

1

9

2

2.

0

.

8

.

2

0

.

1

9

,

,

,

, , , ,

3

/

1

-

55

/

2

2-1

/

2

01

9

,

2

2

.

08.

2

0

1

9

,

,

,

,

,

,

. . , ,

( )

In the said circumstances, nothing remains to be considered. In view of the course of action pursued by the Respondent authorities in setting the

clock back, it is for them to pass consequential orders with regard to the payment of salary and such other benefits to the Appellant herein.

The appeal stands disposed off.