ORDER

This petition under Article 226 of Constitution of India has been filed against order of transfer dated 25.07.2023 passed by respondent No.2 in File No.3829/NREGS-MP/NR-2/Sth./NR-2/2023 and order dated 06.09.2023 passed by respondent No.2 in File No.5255/NREGS-MP/NR-2/Sth./2023 by which representation made by petitioner against transfer order has been rejected.

2. It is the case of petitioner that by order dated 25.07.2023 petitioner, who is working on the post of Account Officer (Contract) was transfer from District Katni to District Shahdol with a direction to execute a new agreement at Shahdol. Petitioner has been working on the present place of posting since 2007 and no one has been posted. Petitioner is not surplus and therefore, there is no question of rationalisation. However, under the guise of administrative exigency, petitioner, who is a contractual employee having meager salary has been transferred to a new place which is Shahdol which will require petitioner to shift alongwith entire family set up at his own expenses as like any other regular employee he is not entitled for regular service benefits like HRA etc. Since petitioner was aggrieved by his transfer order dated 25.07.2023, therefore, he preferred WP No.18953/2023. This Court by order dated 21.08.2023 was pleased to dispose of writ petition directing the respondent to decide the petitioner's representation and till then petitioner was allowed to continue at present place of posting. However, representation made by petitioner has been rejected by order dated 06.09.2023. Respondents have rejected the application only on the ground that post of Project Officer and Accountant is lying vacant in Jila Panchayat Shahdol and therefore, in the light of administrative exigency petitioner has been transferred to Shahdol. It is true that a contractual employee can be transferred but transfer of petitioner to fill up the vacancy at Shahdol cannot be said to be special circumstances. Petitioner has recently lost his mother, who was patient of Cancer, wife of petitioner is also a Government employee and is posted and working as Teacher in Satna. Petitioner was working against sanctioned post of Account Officer under MANREGA.

3. Per contra, petition is opposed by counsel for State. It is submitted that transfer is an exigency of service and no one can claim that he or she should be posted at a particular place.

4. Heard learned counsel for parties.

5. This Court in the case of Sabana Begum Vs. State of M.P. and others, decided on 05.02.2021 in W.P. No.1027/2021 has held that post of contractual employee is a transferable post. A Division Bench of this Court in the case of Seema Pasi Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh and others decided on 25.09.2021 in Writ Appeal No.281/2021 has held that post of contractual employee is a transferable post. However, transfer can be made only in special circumstances.

6. By impugned order respondents have explained the reason for transfer of petitioner. Since post of Account Officer is lying vacant at Shahdol, therefore, it cannot be said that transfer of petitioner is not in administrative exigency or under special circumstances. It is the prerogative of the employer to decide that who should be posted at a particular place.

7. This Court in exercise of power under Article 226 of Constitution of India cannot dwell upon the suitability of a candidate which is within the exclusive domain of State Government/employer. Petitioner has already completed more than 16 years of his stay at Katni. No mala fides haves been alleged. Merely because wife of petitioner is also a Government employee and is posted at Satna cannot be a ground to quash the transfer order. Transfer is an exigency of service and no one can claim that he should be posted at a particular place.

8. The petition is dismissed.

(G.S. AHLUWALIA)

JUDGE vc