MANOJ PARASHAR Vs. STATE OF M. P.
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
STATE OF M. P.
Click here to view full judgement.
Anand Pathak,J. -
(1.) This is a petition preferred by the petitioner who is working as Patwari at Halka No.55, Tahsil Jaura, Distt. Morena and is aggrieved by order dated 18.9.2020 (Annexure P/1) whereby he has been transferred to Patwari Halka No.63, Guda Aasan, Tahsil Jaura.
(2.) It is the submission of learned counsel for the petitioner that on 5.7.2019 respondent No.4 passed an order whereby petitioner had been posted at Patwari Halka No.55 Tahsil Jaura and accordingly petitioner had taken charge of the same on dated 12.10.2019. Since then, he is working satisfactorily as Patwari of said Halka and still to accommodate respondent No.5, he has been transferred from Patwari Halka No.55 and in his place respondent No.5 has been accommodated. It is further submitted that earlier vide order dated 5.7.2019 respondent No.5 was transferred to Tahsil Porsa and being aggrieved by the said order, he preferred a writ petition vide number 17903/2019 and after considering all the material facts and documents available on record, Court passed an order dated 22.1.2020 whereby said writ petition has been dismissed and direction has been given to conduct an enquiry about the allegations of recommendation made by one Public Representative Ravindra Singh Sikarwar because allegations were that recommendation letter was a forged document.
(3.) Thereafter it appears that matter kept pending and vide impugned order the petitioner has been transferred and in his place respondent No.5 has been accommodated. Since the petition preferred by respondent No.5 (W.P.No.17903/2019) was dismissed, but certain directions were given for enquiry, therefore, after the enquiry report being submitted, the petitioner has been shifted and in his place respondent No.5 has been posted which amounts to malafide of State.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.