Madhya Pradesh High Court: Vandana Kasrekar, J., stayed the operation of the impugned order and directed the respondents to decide the representation of the petitioner expeditiously.
In the pertinent case, the petitioner moved the High Court challenging the transfer order, by which his services were transferred from Primary School, Bherupada to Primary School, Himmatkhedi.
The counsel for the petitioner challenged the transfer order on the ground that the transfer order has been issued during the mid-academic session. He further relied upon the judgment passed by the Supreme Court in the case of Director of School Education v. O. Karuppa Thevan, 1994 Supp (2) SCC 666, in which it was held that the employee should not be transferred during the mid-academic session unless administrative exigency requires. He further submitted that in the present case, it has not been mentioned in the transfer order, for which administrative exigency, the petitioner has been transferred.
In light of the above, the Court stayed the operation of the transfer order and directed the respondent to consider and decide the representation of the petitioner in accordance with the law, within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. [Kailash Chand Aak v. State of M.P., 2019 SCC OnLine MP 3982, decided on 18-12-2019]
