IMPORTANT POINT
IMPORTANT POINT
Transfer of Panchayat Secretary must adhere to statutory processes under applicable rules, mandating review by the appropriate authority upon challenge.

ORDER :

Vijay Kumar Shukla, J.

1.The petitioner, who is working on the post of Secretary of the Gram Panchayat, is challenging the orders dated 16.6.2025, Annexure P/6 and order dated 16.6.2025, Annexure P/7, whereby the petitioner has been transferred from Gram Panchayat Rangwasa, Janpad Panchayat Indore to Gram Panchayat Ambada, Janpad Panchayat Mhow. He is further challenging the order dated 4.7.2025 Annexure P/12 passed by the respondent No.3, whereby the representation of the petitioner against transfer has been rejected.

2. Counsel for the petitioner argued that the rejection of the representation by the respondent No.3 Chief Executive Officer, Jilla Panchayat, is contrary to the transfer policy of the General Administration Department dated 29.4.2025, Clause 50, and also the policy of the Panchayat and Rural Development Department dated 21.5.2025.

3. The respondents have filed the reply and submitted that the transfer of the petitioner by the Chief Executive Officer is within his competence and there is no illegality in the transfer order.

4. After hearing learned counsel for parties, this Court finds that the issue involved in the present case is whether the representation against the transfer order of a Panchayat Secretary can be decided by the Chief Executive Officer of the Janpad Panchayat or not.

5. The parties are heard at length.

6. The appointment to the post of Panchayat Secretary is as per the provisions of Sec.69 of Madhya Pradesh Panchayat and Gram Swaraj Adhiniyam, 1993 (for short 'Adhiniyam") read with Sec.95 of the Rules framed called Madhya Pradesh Panchayat Services(Gram Panchayat Secretary Recruitment and Conditions of Service) Rules 2011. Sub-rule (7) of Rule 6 of the Rules 2011 provides as under:-

"(7) The Gram Panchayat Secretary may be transferred on administrative ground or on the basis of his application within the district in accordance with the transfer policy issued by the Commissioner, Panchayate Raj. The Gram Panchayat Secretary may be transferred, if necessary, after proper enquiry of the complaints on the recommendation of the Chief Executive Officer, Janpad Panchayat."

7. As per the aforesaid provision, the Gram Panchayat Secretary may be transferred on administrative grounds or on the basis of his application within the district in accordance with the transfer policy issued by the Commissioner of Panchayati Raj. The Gram Panchayat Secretary may be transferred if necessary after a proper enquiry into the complaints on the recommendation of the Chief Executive Officer, Janpad Panchayat. It is not  in dispute that under the aforesaid provision, the policy of the GAD has been adopted for the transfer of the Panchayat Secretaries. Thus, the GAD policy adopted by the department gets statutory colour in the light of provisions of Sub Rule (7) of Rule 6 of the Rules 2011. Clause 50 of the GAD Policy dated 29.4.2025 provides as under:-

8. As per the aforesaid Clause, the representation against the transfer order has to be decided by the Head of Department with the approval of the concerned Minister of the department. Apart from that, it is relevant to mention here that this Court, while disposing of the writ petition against challenge to the transfer order, WP No.21672/2025, has directed the competent authority to decide the representation in accordance with law. The competent authority to decide the representation as per Clause 50 of the Policy is the Head of Department, i.e., Commissioner, Panchayat Raj.

9. This Court is not oblivious of the fact that the scope of interference in violation of the transfer policy is limited, but in the present case, it has been held that the transfer policy in relation to the transfer of the Panchayat Secretary gets the colour of a statutory nature in the light of Sub Rule (7) of Rule 6 of the Rules 2011. Therefore, the order passed by the CEO, Jilla Panchayat, rejecting the representation of the petitioner is quashed on the ground of competence. The competent authority i.