Rajendra Markam vs State of M.P. and others

This appeal is directed against an order dated 5.7.2013 in Writ Petition No. 11222/2013 by which a writ petition preferred by the appellant against an order dated 25.6.2013 transferring the appellant from Chhindwara to Jabalpur as Senior Sub-Registrar was disposed of with liberty to the appellant to submit a representation against the transfer order. This order has been assailed by the appellant on following grounds:-

(i) That, the appellant was promoted and posted at Chhindwara only on 10.1.2013 vide order Annexure P/1, but within a period of 6 months, he has been transferred from Chhindwara to Jabalpur.

(ii) That, the order has been passed just to accommodate respondent No. 3 who was promoted as Senior Sub-Registrar and was transferred and posted at Chhindwara. It is submitted that the transfer order of the appellant is tainted with malafide and has been issued just to accommodate respondent No. 3, which deserves to be quashed.

Shri Vijay Shukla, learned counsel appearing for respondent No. 3 submits that the respondent No. 3 after promotion has been posted at Chhindwara and her promotion and transfer order was not under challenge before the writ Court. It is submitted that after joining at Chhindwara, respondent No. 3 has already got admitted her children at Chhindwara. It is further submitted by Shri Shukla that husband of respondent No. 3 is a Government Servant and he has also been transferred to Chhindwara.

From the perusal of the order passed by the learned Single Judge and record, we find that the appellant was earlier transferred to Chhindwara, from where he has been transferred to Jabalpur which definitely a bigger place in comparison to Chhindwara. It is for the respondent-authority to look into whether a person is to be posted, as per exigency of the service. Until and unless transfer order is tainted with malafide, suffered from bias and against the statutory rule, such transfer order cannot be interfered.[See: Union of India and Others Vs. S.L. Abbas,

In view of the aforesaid, we do not find any reason to interfere in the impugned order. However, the learned Single Judge has already granted liberty to the appellant to file a representation against transfer order. Needless to say that in case of filing of representation, the competent authority shall consider and decide it in accordance with law expeditiously.

At this stage, it is submitted by Shri Agrawal, learned counsel for appellant that until representation is decided, appellant may be permitted to join at Chhindwara. Suffice it to say that respondent No. 3 has already joined at Chhindwara. Appellant may join at Jabalpur, subject to decision on the representation. The appeal is disposed of finally with no order as to costs.