of M.P. Rural Development Department The Ist respondent was transferred from the post of Block Development Officer, Kurwai, in Vidisha district which he was holding on deputation as aforesaid to the Development Block of Udaipura.
Panbai was interested.
The High Court also directed the State Government to pay all the salary due to the Ist respondent as Block Development Officer.
6297/1031/22/V 2/Est.
The High Court also came to the companyclusion that there was numbermaterial on record to show that there was any bias or mala fide on the part of Smt.
He was working at Udaipura block in a different district altogether.
On the date on which the Ist respondent was repatriated he was number working in Kurwai block which was the block in which Smt.
Aggrieved by the order of the High Court the State Government along with its officers against whom orders were made by the High Court has filed this appeal by special leave.
Sd A.K.Chandra Secretary, Govt.
Name of Panchayat Name of Development No.and Social Educational block where posted Organiser 1 2 3 1 Shri Ashok Deshmukh Kurwai Vidisha In the name and according to the order of Governor of Madhya Pradesh.
16A of 1984 in the Court of Civil Judge, Udaipura for permanent injunction restraining the Government of Madhya Pradesh from repatriating him to his parent department and he obtained an order of temporary injunction in that suit on 15.11.1984 restraining the State Government from relieving him from the post of Block Development Officer at Udaipura and directing the State Government to allow him to companytinue as the Block Development Officer.
Nirmala Buch, the Secretary to the Government of Madhya Pradesh had any ill will against the Ist respondent.
742 of 1985.
The High Court also quashed the order of the State Government dated 20.5.1985 directing the Ist respondent to vacate the Government quarter which had been occupied by him and also the order of suspension which had been passed in the meanwhile.
After the State Government entered appearance in the suit and filed its objections to the order of temporary injunction, the Civil Judge vacated the order of temporary injunction by his order dated 15.3.1985.
In the name and according to the orders of Governor of Madhya Pradesh.
The respondents had filed companynter affidavit denying that Smt.
If required their services may be transferred back to their parental department at any time, after numberice.
In the writ petition two principal companytentions were urged on behalf of the Ist respondent i that the order of repatriation was companytrary to rule 14 of the Madhya Pradesh Civil Services Rules, hereinafter referred to as the Rules , and ii the order of repatriation was arbitrary and was the result of bias and mala fide attitude on the part of Smt.
sd Illegible Secretary Panchayat and Rural Development Department Development Aggrieved by the said order of the State Government sending him back to his parent department, where he held his lien, the Ist respondent filed a suit in Civil Suit No.
District Raisen by an order dated August 1, 1983.
After the writ petition was admitted and a stay order was issued the Ist respondent withdrew the suit filed by him before the Civil Judge, Udaipura.
From the Judgment and Order dated 2.9.1986 of the Madhya Pradesh High Court in C.M.P. No.
The said order read thus GOVERNMENT OF MADHYA PRADESH PANCHAYAT AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT DEVELOPMENT BHOPAL, DATED 29TH JUNE, 1984 ORDER No.
This posting on deputation would be entirely temporary and they would number be entitled to become semi permanent or permanent on this post.
On 29th June, 1984 the services of the Ist respondent were placed at the disposal of his parent department by an order made by the Secretary to the Government, Panchayat and Rural Development Department, Madhya Pradesh.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.
Thereafter the High Court heard all the parties and passed an order dated 2.9.1986 quashing the order of repatriation dated 29.6.1984 sending back the Ist respondent to his parent department and directed the State Government to retain him as officiating Block Development Officer on deputation in the Panchayat and Rural Development Department so long as persons junior to the Ist respondent were retained as Block Development Officers and there existed a vacancy.
The services of Shri Ashok Deshmukh appointed temporarily on deputation as officiating Block Development Officer, Development Block Udaipura, Distt.
Thereafter the Ist respondent filed a writ petition on the file of the High Court of Madhya Pradesh at Jabalpur requesting the High Court to quash the order of repatriation in Miscellaneous Petition No.
2756 of 1987.
The following Panchayat and Social Education Organisers are appointed on the post of officiating Block Development Officer, temporarily and on deputation, from the date of taking charge in the pay scale of Rs.350 25 400 25 500 E.B. 30 650 until further orders and they are posted in Development Block shown against their names.
N. Khare and T.C. Sharma for the Appellants.
Nirmala Buch, Secretary, Panchayat and Rural Development Department.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by VENKATARAMIAH, J. The Ist respondent Ashok Deshmukh was appointed as a Panchayat and Social Education Organizer in the Social Welfare Department, Government of Madhya Pradesh, Bhopal on 16.8.1976.
The relevant portion of the said order, posting the Ist respondent on deputation, read as follows GOVERNMENT OF MADHYA PRADESH PANCHAYAT AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT DEVELOPMENT Bhopal, dated 11th March, 1983 O R D E R Serial Number 1719/1463/22V 2/82.
K. Gambhir for the Respondents.
742 of 1985.
By an order dated 11th March, 1983 he along with 13 others was posted on deputation as an officiating Block Development Officer in the Panchayat and Rural Development Department of the Government of Madhya Pradesh.
Raisen, are returned back to his parental department Social Welfare Department because the same are number required in this department.
