Disposed

Laxman Pandurang Suradkar v. State of Maharashtra, Thr. Principal Secretary, Rural Development Dept., Mumbai and Ors.

Bombay HC12 Apr 2024WP/2468/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Government employees challenged transfer orders issued ahead of the Lok Sabha 2024 elections despite completed tenure and cancelled election duties. The High Court stayed the transfers until the Tribunal decides their interim relief applications, permitting transfers only in annual general transfers.

What did the court decide?

Transfer of petitioners stayed till Tribunal decides interim relief prayer; Tribunal requested to decide expeditiously; no costs.

Laxman Pandurang Suradkar vs State of Maharashtra… — Service and Employment | Bombay HC (2024)

¶1

2024:BHC-NAG:4333-DB

¶2

951-953-WP-2468-24 c 2469-24 c 2470-24.odt 1

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR.

¶4

WRIT PETITION NO. 2468 0f 2024

¶5

Laxman Pandurang Suradkar vs. State of Maharashtra and others.

¶6

With

¶7

WRIT PETITION NO. 2469 0f 2024

¶8

Chandansingh Suratsingh Rajput vs. State of Maharashtra and others.

¶9

With

¶10

WRIT PETITION NO. 2470 0f 2024

¶11

Sandeep Bhanudas Narkhede vs. State of Maharashtra and others.

¶12

Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Court's or Judge's Order Coram, appearances, Court's Orders or directions and Registrar's order

¶13

Shri R.B.Dhore, Advocate for petitioner in all writ petitions.

¶14

Ms N. P. Mehta, Additional Government Pleader for respondent nos. 1 to 3 in all writ petitions.

¶15

CORAM :- NITIN W. SAMBRE AND ABHAY J. MANTRI, JJ. DATE :- 16^th APRIL, 2024.

¶16

P. C.

¶17

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶18

It is not in dispute that all the petitioners are due for transfer having completed their requisite tenure, however such transfers could be effected in the annual general transfers.

¶19

The impugned order before the Tribunal was in relation to the transfer orders issued to the petitioners in view of ensuing Lok Sabha2024 elections.

¶20

The fact remains that the petitioners were assigned with the election duties and the same were cancelled on 21.02.2024. As such considering their posting for more than three years as reflected in, which issue is governed by the directions of the Election Commission dated 21.12.2023 once the petitioners are not assigned with the election duty, they ought not to have transferred for the reason of ensuing Lok Sabha elections. However, they can be transferred in annual general transfers.

¶21

In that view of the matter, we are of the view that since other similarly placed persons like Shri V. D.Saple is already protected by the

¶22

951-953-WP-2468-24 c 2469-24 c 2470-24.odt 2

¶23

order of the Tribunal, we deem it appropriate to stay the transfer of the petitioners till the Tribunal decides the prayer of the petitioners for grant of interim relief.

¶24

We request the Tribunal to decide the prayer of the petitioners for grant of interim relief as expeditiously as possible.

¶25

With these directions, the writ petitions stand disposed of. No

¶26

costs.

¶27

(ABHAY J. MANTRI, J.) (NITIN W. SAMBRE, J.)

¶28

Andurkar.

¶29

Signed by: Jayant S. Andurkar Designation: PA To Honourable Judge Date: 17/04/2024 10:32:30

Laxman Pandurang Suradkar v. State of Maharashtra, Thr. Principal Secretary, Rural Development Dept., Mumbai and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Laxman Pandurang Suradkar v. State of Maharashtra, Thr. Principal Secretary, Rural Development Dept., Mumbai and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Smt. Sapna W/O Digambar Patle (Ku. Sapna D/O Ramesh Harinkhede) Vs the State of Maharashtra, Thr. Chief Secretary, School Education and Sports Dept., Mumbai and Ors.

Smt. Parinita W/O Parmanand Jaiswal Vs State of Maha. Thr. Its Sec. Dept. of State Excise Mantralaya, Mumbai and Others

Anand S/O Jaganath Gulhane Vs State of Maha., Public Works Department, Mumbai and Others

Mohanlal S/O Maluramji Agrawal Vs Smt. Kaladevi W/O Sawarmalji Agrawal and Another

Sushila W/O Bhimrao Sontakke Vs Shriram City Union Finance Ltd., Nagpur

Chandansingh Suratsingh Rajput vs State of Maharashtra, Thr. Principal Secretary, Rural Development Dept., Mumbai and Ors.