IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT INDORE BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE JAI KUMAR PILLAI

th

ON THE 19 OF JANUARY, 2026 REVIEW PETITION No. 2497 of 2025 JEVAN MANDLOI Versus THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS Appearance:

Mr. Vivek Patwa, counsel for the petitioner.

Ms. Drishti Rawal, counsel for the respondents No.1 to 4/State.

Mr. L.C. Patne, counsel for the respondent No.5.

ORDER This review petition has been filed by the review-petitioner who was respondent No.5 in the original petition, under Order 47 Rule 1 read with Section 114 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, seeking review of the order dated 28.11.2025 passed in Writ Petition No.45675 of 2025.

(2) It is contended by the review/petitioner that the petitioner has assailed the order dated 07.07.2023 passed in Writ Petition No.16689 of 2023, whereby his services as Panchayat Secretary was transferred from Gram Panchayat Rangwasa Janpad Panchayat, Indore to Gram Panchayat Jafrabad Janpad Panchayat, Mhow, both in District-Indore (MP). This petition was allowed on 21.11.2023 holding that the adherence to MP Jila Panchayat Rules, 1998. It is contended that the State has assailed the aforesaid order in Writ Appeal No.181/2024 which was allowed on

30.06.2025 holding that the Rules of 1998 are not applicable which was further confirmed by the Hon'ble Apex Court by order dated 28.07.2025 passed in SLP (C) No.19851 of 2025. It is stated that the petitioner was aware of the aforesaid fact but has deliberately concealed the same before this Court in the writ petition and thus, it is prayed that the order be reviewed in light of order passed in DB in Writ Appeal No.181/2024 dated 30.06.2025 and order dated 28.07.2025 passed in SLP (C) No.19851 of 2025. This court has considered the case of respondent No.5 in the connected case, wherein the respondent No.5 has already filed the review petition, wherein it has been specifically contended by him that in the entire petition, he has not relied upon the Rule 15-J of Rules of 1998. Accordingly, the case of the petitioner stood allowed in context to the applicable rules of 2011.

(3) It is contended by the respondent No.5 in the said review petition that Rule 3(b) and 3(d) of Rules, 1994, provides for appointment of Gram Panchayat Secretary by Chief Executive Officer of Jila Panchayat in Gram Panchayats under its control. It is also submitted that even according to sub- rule (7) of Rule 6 of Rules, 2011, the Gram Panchayat Secretary may be transferred on administrative exigency by the CEO.

(4) Counsel for the petitioner submits that the respondents/State has rejected the representation of the petitioner as the same is without jurisdiction and which is without approval of Hon'ble Minister of Panchayat and Rural Development Department, which is spelt out in the transfer policy dated 21.05.2025 read with policy dated 29.04.2025 which is contrary to the directions issued by the State Government as it violates the transfer policy dated 21.05.2025 and 29.04.2025 respectively.

(5) Considering the aforesaid, since this Court has already reviewed the order dated 28.11.2025 passed in Writ Petition No.45675 of 2025 filed by the respondent No.5 herein, the present review petition also stands disposed of in terms of order passed in Review Petition No.2462 of

2025. The present review petition is disposed of accordingly.

Let a copy of this order be placed in the connected case.

(JAI KUMAR PILLAI)

JUDGE Arun/-