AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Heard on the question of admission. By filing this intra Court appeal u/s 2 (1) of the M.P. Uchcha Nyayalaya (Khand Nyaypeeth Ko Appeal) Adhiniyam, 2005 the appellant/writ petitioner has challenged the order dated 13.09.2012 passed in Writ Petition No. 8768/2012(s).
In the writ petition, the petitioner had challenged the order dated 03.09.2012 by which he was relieved to join at the transferred place.
Briefly stated the petitioner a Block Education Officer was transferred vide order dated 01.08.2011 from Alirajpur to Khargone on the post of Assistant Commissioner Tribal Welfare. The said transfer order was challenged by the writ petitioner in Writ Petition No. 8429/2011(s). The said writ petition was disposed of recording the writ petitioner''s undertaking vide order dated 13.01.2012 by observing thus :-
It has not been denied by respondents that the petitioner''s daughter is studying in Class IX and, therefore, keeping in view the petitioner''s undertaking that he is ready to proceed on transfer after completion of the academic session, the petition is finally disposed of with the consent of the parties and the respondent is directed to permit the petitioner to continue at the present place of posting i.e. at Alirajpur till 30.03.2012.
Thereafter when the petitioner was relieved by the order dated 03.09.2012, he filed the aforesaid writ petition No. 8768/2012.
Learned counsel for the appellant urged that since the respondent did not relieve the writ petitioner promptly, the writ petitioner got his daughter admitted for the next academic session in Class-X at Alirajpur and as such now the respondents cannot be allowed to relieve the petitioner after lapse of such a long period.
We find no merit in the submissions made by the learned counsel for the appellant/writ petitioner.
Admittedly, on the basis of the undertaking given by the writ petitioner that he is ready to proceed on transfer after completion of the academic session the writ Court shown indulgence and permitted the writ petitioner to continue at the present place of posting till 30.03.2012.
If the petitioner was not relieved after 30.03.2012 he could have asked for his relieving in view of the specific undertaking being given by him instead of getting admitted his daughter for further studies at Alirajpur. The petitioner was knowing fully well that he can be relieved at any time after 30.03.2012 and as such he cannot be permitted to say that since he got his daughter admitted he be again allowed to continue at his present place. In the circumstances keeping in view of the undertaking being given by the writ petitioner himself, in our considered view the writ Court has rightly dismissed the writ petition challenging the relieving order.
We are not inclined to interfere into the matter in this intra Court appeal and take a different view. Accordingly, the writ appeal fails and is hereby dismissed.