AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Challenge in the present petition is to the order dated 01.10.2026 (Annexure P/1), passed by respondent No.1, whereby the petitioner, who is working as a Sub-Engineer at Panchayat and Rural Development Department and posted at Project Implementation Unit, Mohla-Manpur, has been transferred to Project Implementation Unit, Kondagaon.
Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner has been transferred in violation of the Transfer Policy dated 03.06.2015 and 05.06.2025. He would submit that earlier, the petitioner had worked for more than thirty years in the core Scheduled Area, and he has again been transferred to the core Scheduled Area, which is in violation of the Transfer Policy dated 03.06.2015. He would further submit that the wife of the petitioner is also posted at Government Middle School, Kaudikasa, Block Ambagarh Chowki, and as per Clause 3.13 of the Transfer Policy dated 05.06.2025, the husband and wife may be posted at the same place. He would also submit that, raising his grievance, the petitioner has made his representation dated 05.10.2026 to the respondent authorities, as per Clause 8 of the Transfer Policy dated 05.06.2025, which is yet to be considered by the authorities concerned. He would lastly submit that since the transfer of the petitioner is in violation of the Transfer Policies dated 03.06.2015 and 05.06.2025 , the same may be quashed.
On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner and would submit that there is no restriction that, even if the petitioner had worked in the core Scheduled Area, he cannot be transferred again to the said area. So far as the grievance raised by the petitioner under Clause 3.13 of the Policy dated 05.06.2025 is concerned, the petitioner has already made his representation, and it is for the authorities concerned to decide the same in accordance with Clause 8 of the said Policy. He would also submit that the petitioner cannot claim to be posted at the same place, as he has been transferred in view of administrative exigency. He, therefore, submits that the petition is without merit and is liable to be dismissed.
I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents annexed with the petition.
From perusal of Clause 8 of the Policy dated 05.06.2025, it is evident that the respondent authorities have provided an in-house mechanism for consideration of the grievances of employees who have been transferred under the Policy dated 05.06.2025. The
Clause 8 of the Transfer Policy reads as under:
“8. स्थानांतरण के विरुद्ध अभ्यावेदन
स्थानांतरण से व्यथित शासकीय सेवक द्वारा अपने स्थानांतरण के विरुद्ध अभ्यावेदन केवल स्थानांतरण नीति के उल्लंघन होने पर ही उक्त उल्लंघन होने वाले कंडिका के संबंध में स्पष्ट आधारों के साथ स्थानांतरण आदेश जारी होने की तिथि से 15 दिवस के भीतर प्रश्नाधीन स्थानांतरण आदेश की प्रति सहित शासन द्वारा गठित वरिष्ठ सचिवों की समिति के संयोजक एवं सचिव, सामान्य प्रशासन विभाग को प्रस्तुत किया जा सकेगा। समिति द्वारा ऐसे प्रकरणों का इस स्थानांतरण नीति के प्रकाश में परीक्षण करने के पश्चात अपनी अनुशंसा संबंधित विभाग को प्रेषित की जाएगी।”
Since the petitioner has already raised his grievance by making a representation dated 05.10.2026, as per Clause 8 of the Transfer Policy dated 05.06.2025 and the said representation of the petitioner is to be considered by the authorities concerned, this Court is not inclined to entertain the present petition, at this stage.
Accordingly, the present writ petition is disposed of directing the respondent authorities to decide the representation of the petitioner in an objective manner and pass a reasoned order within the period prescribed under Clause 8 of the Transfer Policy dated 05.06.2025, in accordance with law and on its own merits.
The writ petition accordingly stands disposed of with the aforesaid observation and direction.