M.L. Yadav v. State of Chhattisgarh & Ors.
Case at a glance
Provisions considered
Judgment
S/o. Shri S.K. Yadav, aged about 54 years, Assistant Grade -II, R/o- Near Maharani ^ L- iRffi' '.~..t-'^\ I •^^y"Dls->"" < ^••*<1' "'_ vf\ .;~s^it '^..••" '.\.""'- >rt >»»**l^ Hospital, Jagdalpur, Post 8s Thana- Jagdalpur, District - Baster atJagdalpur, (C.G.) tSX"' VERSUS RESPONDENTS
#1. State of Chhattisgarh, Through : The Secretary, Finance Department Ministiy, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur,(C. G.)
#2. Administration Department And Conver, The Committee of senior Secretary's, Ministry Mahanadi, Bhavan, New Raipur. (C.G.).
#3. Divisional Joint Director. Treasury Account 8s Pension, Baster, Distt.- Baster at Jagdalpur (C.G.) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLB 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF !NDIA The petitioner named above begs.to submit as under: •-^ •^ ^,. ^ • '" .^^ ^-y.B ^ 1 HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPrS)No.1408of2013 PETITIONER M.L. Yadav -Versus- RESPONDENTS: State of Chhattisgarh & others Present Shri Somkant Verma, counsel for the petitioner. Shri Ajay Dwivedi, Deputy Govt. Adv^cate for the State/respondents. Sinale Bench: Hon'ble Shri Prashant Kumar Mishra. J. ORAL ORDER (16-12-2013)
#1. The petitioner is challenging the order dated 31.7.2012 (Annexure-P/1) by which he has been transferred from the office of Divisional Joint Director, Treasury Accounts & Pension, Jagdalpur to District Treasury, Kanker on administrative ground.
#2. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is office bearer of recognized union, therefore, he is protected from transfer and there is violation of guidelines framed by the State Government. It is a trite law that transfer/posting is an incidence of service. The Court
#3. should not interfere with the transfer/posting order unless there is malice, infringement of statutory rules and regulations. The employee may be posted anywhere at the instance of the employer in public interest and administrative exigency. Further, it is for the Government to post another person if any vacancy arises on account of transfer/posting of an employee. (See E.P. Royappa v. State of Tamil Nadu and another1, Shilpi Bose (Mrs.) and others v. State of Bihar & anotherz, State of M.P. and another v. S.S. Kourv and others3, Mohd. MasoodAhmad v. State ofU.P. & Others" Chief Commercial Manager, South Central Railway, \ Secunderabad & Others v. G. Ratnam & Others5 and Airports Authority of ^lndia v. Rajeev Ratan Pandey & Others6). 1 2 3 4 5 6
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.