The Indore Bench of the Madhya Pradesh High Court recently ruled against a petition challenging a government employee’s transfer on grounds of religious bias. The Court stated that accepting such unverified allegations could disrupt the execution of administrative orders. The petition was dismissed as the petitioner failed to prove any mala fide intention on the part of the State.
A single-judge bench of Justice Subodh Abhyankar observed:
"If such unsubstantiated allegations are allowed to be entertained on their face value, it would lead to a serious breach in execution of administrative orders. If accepted, tomorrow any senior officer from a Muslim community passing a transfer order for a non-Muslim subordinate could also be accused of communal bias, leading to a breakdown of the State machinery and disorder. Such practices must be discouraged at the threshold itself."
Case Background
The petitioner, an In-charge Assistant Controller, Legal Metrology in Ratlam, was transferred to Chhindwara for the same post. He filed a petition claiming that his transfer was politically motivated and influenced by a local leader of the Bhartiya Janata Party (BJP) because he belongs to the Muslim community.
Read also: Supreme Court to Decide on Reconsideration of Death Penalty Through Writ Petition Under Article 32
The petitioner argued that his transfer violated Article 14 of the Constitution of India, which guarantees equality before the law. He contended that he was discriminated against based on religion.
The State’s counsel countered the petitioner’s claims, stating that the petition was filed with mala fide intention to exploit his religious identity. The State emphasized that transferring multiple employees from the same community does not imply communal bias.
"Merely because four employees from the same community were transferred does not indicate mala fide intent," the State's counsel argued.
Read also: Supreme Court Demands Apology from Seoni District Bar Association Members Over Lawyers' Strike
After hearing both parties, the Court noted that while the petitioner alleged communal bias in his transfer, none of the other transferred employees joined him in his legal battle.
Furthermore, the Court observed that the petitioner had remained in Ratlam for over nine years, despite government transfer policies under Clauses 16 and 17, which typically mandate transfers after three years.
"When the petitioner has stayed in Ratlam for over nine years, despite transfer policies requiring movement every three years, it is difficult to accept his claim that his transfer was politically motivated," the Court stated.
The petitioner also alleged that his transfer was influenced by a BJP leader, but the Court found no substantial evidence supporting this claim. The source of the document he relied on was unclear, and its authenticity was questionable.
Moreover, the Court highlighted that three other non-Muslim employees, including a woman, were also transferred, further disproving claims of religious bias.
"The petitioner’s unwillingness to move from Ratlam, even at the cost of making baseless communal allegations, only shows a desperate attempt to stall his transfer. This is highly condemned," the Court noted.
Additionally, the Court pointed out that under the same government, the petitioner had earlier been assigned additional responsibilities as Deputy Controller of Legal Metrology, Indore. This indicated that his religious identity had not hindered his career growth, contradicting his claims of discrimination.
Considering all factors, the Madhya Pradesh High Court dismissed the petition and ruled that there was no mala fide intent in the transfer order. The Court strongly discouraged attempts to misuse religious identity to challenge administrative decisions.
Case Title: Naseem Uddin Versus State Of Madhya Pradesh Through Principal Secretary Vallabh Bhawan, Bhopal (M.P) And Others, Writ Petition No. 11441 of 2025
