- (1.) By notification dated 9th June, 1998, issued under section 76 of the Madhya Pradesh Nagar Tatha Gram Nivesh Adhiniyam, 1973 (Adhiniyam for the sake of brevity), the State Government declared that the Special Area Development Authority, Bhilai be dissolved with effect from 9-6-1998 and all assets and liabilities of the dissolved Special Area Development Authority shall stand vested in Nagar Palik, Bhilai, constituted under section 7 of the M. P. Nagar Palik Nigam Adhiniyam, 1956, Nagar Panchayat Kumhari constituted under the provisions of section 5 of the M. P. Nagar Palika Adhiniyam and a Nagar Palik Nigam Durg, constituted under the provisions of section 405(2) of Madhya Pradesh Nagar Palik Nigam Adhiniyam. The respondent/State, Municipal Corporation Bhilai or Nagar Panchayat Kumhari have not produced any other document on record to show that what particular employees were transferred to these authorities. After constitution of these three authorities, the State Government issued yet another notification on 4-9-1998 (Annexure R.2/2) transferring the particular assets. On 14-9-1998 under Annexure R.2/3, the Municipal Corporation, Bhilai directed posting of as many as 34 persons from the staff of Municipal Corporation, Bhilai with Nagar Panchayat at Kumhari. The petitioner was included in the said list. On 1-1-1999 (may be 2-1-1999), Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Bhilai required the present petitioner to give his consent for his transfer and posting to Nagar Panchayat, Kumhari. On 4-1-1999 the petitioner vide Annexure P.3., reserved his consent and refused for his transfer. On 4-1-1999, Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Bhilai issued as office order stating that in accordance with order of the Corporation, bearing No. 1281 dated 14-9-1998, persons who were transferred for posting at Nagar Panchayat Kumhari stand relieved. The petitioner thereafter joined at Kumhari, but Nagar Panchayat, Kumhari appreciating that they were not in need of 34 employees contacted and approached some minister and after obtaining his oral approval transferred 14 persons from Kumhari to Municipal Corporation, Bhilai. The order was issued on 27-2-1999 after approval of the administrator. The name of the petitioner was included in this list. After being relieved from Nagar Panchayat Kumhari, the petitioner approached the Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Bhilai and gave his joining report. According to the petitioner he was not permitted to join as according to the Commissioner, the earlier transfer was absolute and the State Government did not direct for retransfer. The records show that on 17-3-1999, the State Government passed an order asking the Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Bhilai that Kumhari Nagar Panchayat was in need of 26 persons only and proceedings for creation of 26 posts was under consideration, therefore, 8 persons be called back from Kumhari and only 26 persons/employees be posted at Kumhari Nagar Panchayat. The Order Annexure R.2/7 does not say anything that which employees were to be retained and which were to be transferred. It appears that everything was left to the discretion of Nagar Panchayat, Kumhari and/or Municipal Corporation Bhilai. Vide order Annexure R.2/8 dated 9-4-1999. Municipal Corporation Bhilai proposed re-transfer in favour of 8 persons named in the said order.
(2.) The petitioner on one side was relieved by Nagar Panchayat Kumhari and on the other hand was not being permitted by the Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Bhilai to join, approached this Court. this Court on 12-5-1999 passed an interim order directing that the petitioner may be allowed to rejoin-services at Municipal Corporation, Bhilai and salary be paid to him by Municipal Corporation, Bhilai subject to further directions by this Court regarding its reimbursement.
(3.) Respondent/Municipal Corporation has submitted that after re-organisation of Sada, Bhilai they were asked by the State Government to transfer their employees therefore, they had issued order, transferring 34 persons. Kumhari Nagar Panchayat did not contest the petition on the said material aspect but however submitted that as they were in need of 26 persons only, 34 employees could not be thrusted. Being alive to the entire drama going on and also knowing that the petitioner was running from pillar to post so that he may be joined at some place. The State Government in its return simply stated that the dispute was between the petitioner on one side and the Municipal Corporation Bhilai and Nagar Panchayat Kumhari on the other side. The return filed by the State shows absolute lack of consideration and non-application of mind. The State Government had asked the Corporation to transfer and post certain persons at Nagar Panchayat Kumhari. After receiving the notice of this petition, it came to the knowledge of the State Government that on one side the petitioner stood relieved from Nagar Panchayat Kumhari and on the other hand the Municipal Corporation, Bhilai was not permitting him to join the duties, did not step in the matter nor cared to pass any order. The act of the State Government cannot be approved. When the State Government passes an order it must have the sufficient material before it, before the order is passed. When the order is proposed to be passed it cannot be passed on the whims of the authority having the jurisdiction to pass the order. The authority before exercising its discretion must have the positive material before it otherwise such orders of the State Government would always create a chaotic condition. It is most unfortunate that even the State Government did not step in the matter, resolve the dispute and pass some orders. The State Government was happy and content by passing one order or the other and when the ball came in their field they were again content by saying that the dispute was between the petitioner and the local authorities. At this stage Shri Jha learned Deputy Advocate General submitted that as the petitioner did not file any representation before the State Government, the State Government could not pass any orders. I am astonished by this astounding proposition. After the notice of this petition was served on the State, it could persuade the State Government and its authorities to open their eyes, to come out of their hibernation and act in accordance with law. The State Government and its authorities and their representatives cannot be exempted simply on the ground that the petitioner did not make any representation before it therefore, they could not pass any order in favour of the petitioner. Why an advance copy is supplied to the Learned Counsel for the State Why the notices are issued to the State Government Are these documents to be received and thrown, or these are required to be read in their true perspective so that somebody at some level after going through the contents of the petition, proceeds to take some positive step in the matter. It cannot be gain said by the Learned Counsel for the State that they were not required to take any action in the matter.;