Sanat Kumar Dwivedi vs The State of Madhya Pradesh

U.C. Maheshwari, J.—Heard on the question of admission. The petitioner who is working as Sub Inspector at Rewa has filed this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India being aggrieved by the order/decision dated 4.3.2012 passed by respondent No. 3 as Order No. 1553/13 for issuing appropriate writ for the following reliefs:

a writ of certiorari quashing the impugned order (Ann. P. 3).

a command to Respondents to refund the amount deducted from the petitioner''s salary.

to grant any other relief deemed fit in the circumstances.

The petitioner counsel after taking me through the averments of the petition as well as the papers placed on record along with the aforesaid order dated 4.3.2013 (Ann. P. 3), argued that earlier the petitioner was posted at Jabalpur and while such posting he was allotted government accommodation where he along with his family was residing and still his family is residing in such accommodation but he has been transferred before some months from Jabalpur to Rewa where he has not been allotted any government accommodation for his residence. So, in such premises he is entitled to retain the possession of aforesaid government accommodation till the availability of government accommodation at Rewa. He further said that it being mid education session, it is not possible to him to vacate government accommodation of Jabalpur because his children are studying at some school of Jabalpur.

On asking the petitioner''s counsel that under what provisions or law after transfer the petitioner is entitled to retain the possession of the government quarter beyond the prescribed period, which has been fixed under the Rules, on which he could not show any provision in this regard and prayed to invoke the mercy on the petitioner. He also submits that his appeal dated 15.3.2013 (Ann. P. 1 and representation Ann. P. 6) with respect of dispute raised in this petition are also pending before the authorities of the respondents for adjudication and according to his information the same has not been decided till today and prayed to admit and allow this petition.

Having heard the counsel keeping in view his arguments I have carefully gone through the papers placed on record. In the lack of any specific provision that a person like the petitioner may retain the government quarter even after his transfer from one place to another, I am not inclined either to admit or issue any notice to the other side. However, without expressing any opinion on merits of the matter, the petition is disposed of with a direction to the authorities of the respondent No. 3 and 4, as the case may be, to consider and decide the above mentioned appeal and representation of the petitioner, with speaking order within thirty days from the date of filing the certified copy of this order along with the copy of petition and Annexures in the office of the respondent No. 3 and 4 by the petitioner. The authorities of such respondents are further directed to intimate the petitioner about the decision within further fifteen days, till then no coercive steps be taken against the petitioner to vacate the disputed accommodation and thereafter the authority shall be at liberty to proceed further in accordance with the procedure prescribed under the law. The petitioner is also directed to submit the aforesaid papers along with the copy of this order in the office of the Respondent No. 3 and 4 within ten days from today, failing which respondent shall not be bound to comply the aforesaid direction. C.C. today.