Full Judgment
Prashant Agrawal versus State of M.P.& ORS.Writ Petition No.12769 ”
5. 9.2012 Shri Sanjay Agrawal, learned counsel for the petitioner.
Smt.
D.K.Bohrey, learned Panel Lawyer for the State, on advance notice.
Petitioner is working as Naib Tahsildar (Revenue) in Tahsil Raipur Karchuliyan, District Rewa.
By the impugned order Annexure P-7 dated 12.7.2012 petitioner has been transferred to Balaghat.
Inter alia contending that between 10.12.2007 to 25.1.2012 petitioner has been transferred for more than 7 occasions in various places within the district and not his transfer out of the district amounts to frequent transfer, interference into the matter is sought for.
Further contending that the Collector Rewa vide letter dated 13.7.2012 Annexure P-16 due to shortage of staff has recommended for cancelling transfer of petitioner, prayer made is to interfere into the matter.
That apart, pointing out various inconveniences due to ailment of petitioner in carrying out order of transfer interference into the matter is sought for.
Smt.
Bohre learned counsel points out that petitioner's earlier transfer were all within the district of Rewa, the petitioner has remained in Rewa for a long period of time and it is not that the State Government has transferred the petitioner out of the District.
She invited my attention to the order of transfer Annexure P-7 dated 12.7.2012 and points out that more than 33 Tehsildars have been transferred from various places in the State of M.P.as an administrative measure and in the absence of any statutory provision being shown to be violated, Smt.
Bohre submits that interference into the matter is not called for.
2 I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record, even though petitioner has tried to emphasize that transfer of petitioner amounts to frequent transfer, but the fact remains that petitioner has continued to remain in Rewa for more than 5 yeaRs.It seems that the petitioner was appointed on 14.12.2007, as is evident from Annexure P-1 after his selection and right from the year 2007 since his appointment he has remained in one district Rewa and the so called transfer between the period 10.12.2007 to 25.1.2012 are local posting of the petitioner from one Tehsil to another in the same District of Rewa, it is not for the fiRs.time that after period of 5 yeaRs.petitioner is transferred along with more than 37 other Naib Tehsildar in an administrative exercise being conducted by the State Government that showing that Naib Tehsildar who have remained in one district for long period of time.
Keeping in view the aforesaid and considering the fact no statutory rules or regulations is violated in terminating petitioner and no malafide are made out from the material available on record, merely on the ground of personal inconveniences of petitioner due to ailment of his wife interference into the matter is not called for.
Accordingly, finding no grounds to interfere into the matter the petition is disposed of granting liberty to the petitioner to take recouRs.of departmental remedies available.
The petition is disposed of with the aforesaid.
(Rajendra Menon) Judge ss*