Justice Vijay Kumar Shukla dismissed the petition filed by Satya Narayav Pandey. The petitioner was working as Panchayat Secretary. By an impugned order the petitioner has been transferred from one Gram Panchayat to another on administrative ground. Counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner was appointed as Panchayat Karmi in the Gram Panchayat and therefore his services ought to have not been transferred. Services of the petitioner are governed by the Madhya Pradesh Panchayat Service Gram Panchayat Secretary Recruitment and Conditions of Service Rules, 2011 whereby services of the petitioner has been absorbed as Secretary of the Gram Panchayat and services of the Secretary of Gram Panchayat are transferrable. In view of the aforesaid, no interference is called for. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed, the single bench said in the order.

Authority ordered to consider Patwari’s transfer order

Justice Vijay Kumar Shukla disposed off the petition filed by Ramdaroga Pathak with a direction to the competent authority to consider and decide the representation of the petitioner within a period of two months from of the date of communication of the order. In the instant petition, the petitionerm who is working as Patwari, has challenged his transfer from Rahatgarh tehsil to Banda Sagar district by the order dated on September 15.

On query being made, counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has already completed more than three years in one tehsil and has also made a representation against the transfer order mainly on the ground that he was due for retirement in the next year and had medical problems. Petitioner has been transferred within the district from one tehsil to another. He had already stayed for more than three years in one tehsil. In view of this, the petition was disposed of with a direction to the competent authority to consider and decide the representation of the petitioner within a period of two months, the single bench stated.

Retired staffer’s leave encashment plea disposed off

Justice Nandita Dubey has disposed off the petition filed by Ramnarayan Gupta. By the instant petition, the petitioner was claiming that despite his retirement, even after one year, his claim of leave encashment had not been settled by the respondents and no amount was paid to him. Counsel for the petitioner submitted that petitioner had made a representation before the Block Education Officer, but, the same is still pending. Considering the above, this petition is disposed of directing respondent Block Education Officer to consider and decide the representation of the petitioner and also decide the pending claim of the petitioner of leave encashment within a period of three months from submitting certified copy of this order. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merit of the case. However, it was for the authority to consider and decide the claim of the petitioner of leave encashment according to the entitlement of the petitioner. With the aforesaid, this petition is disposed off, the single bench said.