Smt. Gangawati Thakur v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPS No. 1425 of 2018 Smt. Gangawati Thakur W/o Sardar Singh Aged About 50 Years Working As Accountant / Junior Auditor In The Office Of Civil Surgeon Cum Hospital Superintendent Dantewada District Dantewada, Chhattisgarh. R/o Harampara Geedam District South Bastar Dantewada, Chhattisgarh., District : Dantewada, Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary, Department Of Public Health And Family Welfare Department Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan New Raipur, P.S. Rakhi, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

2. The Joint Director, Office Of Health Department Bastar Division Jagdalpur, District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

3. The Civil Surgeon Cum Chief Superintendent Of Hospital District Hospital Dantewada, District South Bastar Dantewada, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh ---- Respondents Shri P.K.Tulsyan, counsel for the petitioner/s. Shri Majid Ali, Dy.G.A. for the State.

Hon'ble Shri Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava Order On Board 01/03/2018 The petitioner has filed this petition against transfer order dated 12/08/2017 and rejection of representation vide order dated 04/01/2018. 2.

Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the District Hospital, Dantewada, where the petitioner has been posted as Accountant, requires an Accountant and the impugned order does not show that in place of the petitioner, any other employee has been posted. It is submitted that the petitioner has been transferred to a place at Sukma which is about 100 kms. away from the place of posting and if the petitioner requires to undergo transfer, she would suffer hardship. It is also submitted that the transfer of the petitioner is against the transfer policy. According to the petitioner, when she was promoted vide order dated 02/06/2017, though the petitioner was given posting at

the same place, normally after promotion, transfers are not made within such a short time i.e. within two months.

3.

Learned State counsel would submit that the reason assigned for rejection of representation show that the transfer is on administrative grounds. 4.

Taking into consideration that after promotion, the petitioner was posted at the same place and it is not a case where within two months, she has been shifted with bags and baggages as the place of transfer is about 100 kms, I am not inclined to interfere with the impugned order. The petition is accordingly dismissed. In future, after completion of normal tenure of one year, the petitioner may apply for transfer on personal grounds to any other non-scheduled area. SD/- Sd/- (Manindra Mohan Shrivastava) Judge Deepti