HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
Sanjay K. Agrawal, J.
Ashwani Kumar Mire, S/o Shri Alath Ram Mire – Appellant
Versus
State of Chhattisgarh & Ors. – Respondents
Writ Petition(s) No. 250 of 2022
Decided On : 18-01-2022
Suspension - Transfer of Employee - Chhattisgarh Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1966 - Rule 9
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, a teacher, was suspended and later had his suspension revoked. However, he was transferred to a different district and sought to be posted at his earlier place of posting.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the employee has no legal right to be posted and continued in the same place of posting on revocation of suspension, as he only has a lien on the post and not on the place of posting. The competent authority has the jurisdiction to change the place of posting as per administrative exigency.
Issues: The main issue was whether the Divisional Joint Director (Education) was justified in transferring the petitioner to another district after revoking his suspension.
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the Chhattisgarh Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1966 and previous judgments to establish that an employee has no legal right to be posted at the same place after the revocation of suspension.
Final Decision: The court rejected the petitioner's claim to be posted at his earlier place of posting after the revocation of suspension, but allowed him to make a representation for posting in District Bemetara, which would be considered and decided within a specified timeframe.
JUDGMENT :
1. The petitioner was earlier working as Teacher (L.B.) and he was placed under suspension by order dated 08/06/2020 under Rule 9 of Chhattisgarh Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1966. Thereafter, he preferred WPS No. 2967/2020 questioning the order of suspension whereby he was allowed to make representation for revocation of suspension vide order dated 06/08/2020 passed by this Court. In pursuance thereof, petitioner moved a representation and ultimately by order dated 21/09/2021 (Annexure P/1) passed by respondent No. 3, his suspension has been revoked, but now he has been posted at Government Middle School, Kandabani, Block Pandariya, District Kabirdham and suspension allowance has been confined for the purpose of pension against which this writ petition has been preferred by him.
2. Mr. C. Jayant K. Rao, learned counsel for the petitioner, would submit that while revoking the order of petitioner's suspension, his place of posting could not have been changed and since no departmental action has been taken against him, therefore, he is entitled to be posted at his earlier place of posting and further entitled for full backwages of the suspension period. He would further submit that petitioner may be allowed to make a representation so that he may be posted in District Bemetara where he was earlier working.
3. Mr. Amrito Das, learned Additional Advocate General, would invite the attention of this Court in the decision rendered by the Division Bench of this Court in the matter of L.P. Saket v. Chhattisgarh State Civil Supplies Corporation Limited WPS No. 7269/2017 decided on 15/11/2018 wherein it has already been held that it is not a thumb rule that an employee whose suspension has been revoked has a right to be posted and continued in the same place of posting on revocation of suspension, as he only has a lien on the post and not on the place of posting, therefore, the instant writ petition deserves to be dismissed, however, if the representation is made by the petitioner, it will be considered and decided strictly in accordance with law.
4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, considered their rival submissions made hereinabove and went through the records with utmost circumspection.
5. The short question for consideration in this writ petition would be, whether the Divisional Joint Director (Education) is justified in transferring the petitioner to another District after revoking his suspension ?
6. In order to answer this plea, it would be appropriate to notice the judgment rendered by this Court in the matter of L.P. Saket (supra) wherein the Division Bench formulated the following question for consideration in paragraph 1 :-
7. Thereafter, the aforesaid question has been answered by the Court in paragraphs 12 and 14 of the judgment, which states as under :-
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.