@JUDGMENTTAG-ORDER
Krishn Kumar Lahoti, J.@mdashThis appeal is directed against order dated 25.7.2011 u/s 2(1) of M.P.Uccha Nyalalay (Khand Nyaya Peeth Ko Appeal) Adhiniyam, 2005.
2. The learned Counsel for the Appellant submitted that the order Annexure P/1 passed by the Collector is based on incorrect facts. The Appellant was transferred on 14.6.2011 but the Collector has considered the date of transfer as 14.6.2010 and on this wrong premises, he has found that the Appellant has completed three years at the place of his posting while on the date of order dated 14.6.2010 Appellant had completed only two years and the Appellant was transferred contrary to the transfer policy.
3. This is a second round of litigation. Earlier, the Appellant''s transfer order dated 14/6/2010 was subject-matter of W.P. No. 5693/2010. The aforesaid matter was finally decided by order dated 31.3.2011 which reads thus:
Shri D.K. Tripathi, learned Counsel for the Petitioner The Petitioner is working as a Patwari in Patwari Halka No. 34 Mau Sahania, Tehsil Nowgaon, Dist. Chhatarpur. By the impugned order dated 14.06.2010, the Petitioner has been transferred from Tehsil Nowgaon to Tehsil Gaurihar, about 100 Kms away from the present place of posting. Challenge to the impugned order is made mainly on the ground that the Petitioner has certain personal inconveniences in carrying out the order of transfer due to education of his children. It is further stated that though the impugned order was passed on 14.06.2010, the order has not been given effect till date and the Petitioner is continuing at his present place of posting.
Keeping in view the aforesaid and taking note of the fact that the impugned order is challenged on the ground of personal inconvenience, it is for the Respondent nos 2 and 3 to consider the grievance of the Petitioner and take action. In view of the above, it is directed that on the Petitioner''s filing a certified copy of this order, Respondent No. 2 and 3 shall consider the grievance of the Petitioner and decide it by a speaking order.
Till the aforesaid exercise is not completed, the Petitioner shall be permitted to work at his present place of posting, if he has not been relieved.
With the aforesaid observations, the petition stands disposed of.
4. Thereafter the Appellant submitted a representation and it has been rejected vide order Annexure P/1 dated 6.7.2011. Though it is correct that in the order, date of transfer is mentioned as 14.6.2011 while the correct date of transfer is 14.6.2010. Apart from this, the place of transfer of the Appellant and case number of earlier petition are also incorrect.
5. But the aforesaid facts will not effect the merits of the case. In earlier round of litigation, the Appellant had shown his personal inconveniences for complying with the transfer but it appears that the aforesaid grounds were not raised in the representation. Merely in the order of the Collector,date, case number and place are mentioned incorrectly will not be ground to quash the transfer order dated 14.6.2010. The Petitioner is a Patwari, he has been transferred in the same district from Patwari Halka No. 34 Mau, Tehsil Nowgaon to Tehsil Gaurihar. The aforesaid places are within the District of Chhatarpur. The Appellant has now completed 3 years at the present place of posting.
6. In view of the aforesaid, we do not find any merit in this appeal. This appeal is without merit and is dismissed,with No. order as to costs.
