WP/8641/2016 of KISHOR KUMAR VYAS Vs HOME DEPARTMENT on 29 December 2016

W.P NO.8641/2016

29.12.2016:

Ms.Ishita Agrawal, learned counselfor the petitioner.

Shri Umesh Gajankush, learned Dy.A.Gfor the respondent/State.

Petitioner has filed the present

petition being aggrieved by the orderdated 24.12.2016 by which he has beentransferred from SDOP, Jawara to DSP(AJAK), district Shajapur. Petitioner haschallenged the transfer order on theground that he is going to retire from service on 31.07.2017 i.e within less than one year and as per clause 8.10 ofthe Transfer Policy the employees who arehaving one year or less than one year service then he/she be not normallytransferred and if on administrativeexigency the transfer is required thentransfer will be made on the basis of theoption.

It is clear from the order (AnnexureP/2) dated 31.05.2016 that the retirementof the petitioner is due on 31.07.2017and clause 8.10 of the Transfer Policy

given protection to those employees who

have less than one year service forretirement. Counsel for the petitionersubmits that on administrative exigencyif transfer is necessary then he may betransferred to the district Dhar ordistrict Indore where he would be settledafter retirement.

Without entering into the merits ofthe case, the petition is disposed ofwith direction the petitioner to submit adetailed representation to respondentNo.1 by giving his option for his postingby way of transfer within a week fromtoday. If such a representation issubmitted the respondent No.1 is directedto consider and decide the same inaccordance with clause 8.10 of theTransfer Policy.

In place of the petitioner oneDayaram Maley has been transferred asSDOP, Jawara but he has not been made asrespondent in this writ petition,therefore, no stay can be granted againsthim. If the respondent No.1 decides therepresentation in favour of the

petitioner for his continuance as SDOP,Jawara then opportunity of hearing bealso given to Dayaram Maley. If therespondent No.1 considers the transfer ofthe petitioner at Indore or any otherplace of his choice then no opportunityof hearing is necessary to Dayaram Maley.For a period of thirty days or tillthe representation of the petitioner isdecided by respondent No.1, no coerciveaction shall be taken against him.

With the aforesaid direction, writpetition stands disposed of.

C.c as per rules.

hk/

(VIVEK RUSIA) JUDGE