Judgment

Sujoy Paul, J.;-

1. Since the same transfer order is challenged in these petitions, with the consent of parties, matters are analogously heard and are decided by this common order. Facts are taken from W.P. No. 7731/2012.

2. In this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution, the petitioner, a Panchayat Secretary, assailed the order dated 13.07.2012, whereby he is transferred. It is assailed on three counts. (1) As per the transfer policy dated 31st March, 2012 (Annexure P-2), the transfer after 15th July, 2012 are impermissible. (2) The transfer beyond 15% are impermissible. (3) The Collector vide Annexure P-1 dated 17.07.2012 opined that the same is against the transfer policy.

3. No other point is pressed by the learned counsel for the petitioner.

4. Per Contra, Shri Rathore supported the order and submits that it is a purely administrative order. The transfer policy dated 31st March, 2012 is an executive instruction. It is guideline and doesn't have any statutory force.

5. A Division Bench of this Court in R.S. Chaudhary Vs. State of M.P. and others [(2007) ILR M.P. 1329] has held that merely because a guideline/transfer policy is violated, it will not render the t