IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SUSHRUT ARVIND DHARMADHIKARI ON THE 4^th OF MAY, 2022 WRIT PETITION No. 28012 of 2021 Between:-

AMAR SINGH YADAV S/O SHRI HALKE SINGH YADAV, AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, OCCUPATION: GRAM ROJGAR SAHAYAK (SECRETARY) GRAM PANCHAYAT BILHARI, JANPAD PANCHAYAT LOVEKUSHNAGAR DISTT. CHHATARPUR (MADHYA PRADESH)

.....PETITIONER (SHRI PRAVEEN VERMA, LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE PETITIONER )

AND

1. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THR.

PRINCIPAL SECRETARY PANCHAYAT AND RURAL DEV. DEPARTMENT VALLABH BHAWAN BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)

2. UPPER COLLECTOR (DEVELOPMENT)

AVAM CEO ZILA PANCHAYAT DISTT.

CHHATARPUR (MADHYA PRADESH)

3. CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER JANPAD PANCHAYAT LOVEKUSHNAGAR DISTT.

CHHATARPUR (MADHYA PRADESH)

.....RESPONDENTS (SMT. SHRADDHA TIWARI, LEARNED PANEL LAWYER FOR THE RESPONDENTS/STATE )

This petition coming on for admission this day, the court passed the following:

ORDER

In this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has assailed the legality, validity and propriety of the order dated 30.11.2021 (Annexure P/1) passed by respondent No.2, whereby the charge of Secretary, Gram Panchayat Bilhari has been withdrawn from the petitioner.

2. The brief facts leading to filing of this petition are that the petitioner is working as Gram Rojgar Sahayak at Gram Panchayat Bilhari. Earlier in the year 2017, the petitioner had been given the charge of Secretary of Gram Panchayat Bilhari vide order dated 01.07.2017. Thereafter, one R.D. Rajput was made Secretary but in view of complaints against him, he was removed and again vide order dated 23.11.2020, the petitioner was given charge of Secretary of Gram Panchayat Bilhari. Again, vide order dated 26.10.2021, the charge of Secretary was given to one Ram Saran Ahirwar, who was already having charge of another Gram Panchayat but because he was unable to do work of both the Gram Panchayats, respondent No.3 sent a proposal on 18.11.2021 to respondent No.2 to once again give the charge of Secretary to the petitioner. In view of the proposal sent by respondent No.3, respondent No.2 has passed an order dated 25.11.2021 vide which the charge of Secretary, Gram Panchayat Bilhari was given to the petitioner. But all of a sudden within five days, respondent No.3 has cancelled the order dated 25.11.2021 and the additional charge of Secretary, Gram Panchayat Bilhari has been withdrawn. Hence, this petition.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the impugned order is manifestly illegal, arbitrary and erroneous and therefore, deserves to be quashed. The impugned order has been passed owing to complaints against the petitioner as a penalty. It is further submitted that the order impugned violates the instructions of the respondent No.1 which directs for immediate stoppage of giving charge of two Gram Panchayats to one Secretary and directs that only one Secretary be made for one Gram Panchayat. It is further contended that no opportunity of hearing was granted to the petitioner and the impugned order is per se illegal. In this regard, the petitioner has submitted a representation dt.14.12.2021 (Annexure P/7), which is still pending consideration. Therefore, the impugned order is liable to be set aside.

4. On the other hand, learned Government Advocate for the respondents/State submitted that the petitioner has no vested right over the additional charge of Secretary, Gram Panchayat Bilhari, which is of temporary nature, as is evident from the order dated 25.11.2021 (Annexure P/6). There is no violation of any legal or fundamental right of the petitioner. The service condition of the petitioner is also not changed by withdrawing the additional charge. It is further contended that the petitioner has no right to ask for or stick to the additional charge. The impugned order does not cause any financial loss or prejudice of any kind to the petitioner. If the petitioner is unable to discharge his duties efficiently, the authorities