Sharda Jaiswal v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (S) NO. 1551 OF 2019 Sharda Jaiswal D/o Late Shri M.R. Jaiswal Aged About 57 Years Working As Deputy Director, Braille Press, Bilaspur Chhattisgarh. R/o J.P. Vihar Colony, Mangla Road, Police Station - Civil Lines, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh.

---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Social Welfare Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Capital Complex, Atal Nagar Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh.

2. The Under Secretary, Chhattisgarh State, Social Welfare Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Capital Complex, Atal Nagar Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh.

3. The Director, Social Welfare Directorate, Raipur Chhattisgarh.

4. Collector Bilaspur, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner :

Shri Dharmesh Shrivastava, Advocate.

For State :

Shri Sameer Behar, P.L.

Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board 06.03.2019

1. The Challenge in the present writ petition is to the order Annexure P/1 dated 20.02.2019 whereby the services of the petitioner has been transferred from Bilaspur to Balrampur.

2. The contention of the petitioner is that the present order of transfer passed against the petitioner within a span of just about two and a half years.

3. According to the petitioner, she was first transferred on 27.06.2016 from Mungeli to Raigarh, again she was transferred on 14.08.2017 from Raigarh to Raipur, and thereafter again from Raipur to Raigarh vide order dated 16.02.2018. The petitioner sincerely abided by each of the order of transfer and discharged her duties, however, in less

than one year time, the petitioner has again being transferred from Bilaspur to Balrampur.

4. According to the petitioner, there does not seem any Administrative exigency on the part of the respondent and the petitioner is being shifted frequently only in order to accommodate some other persons in the department and the petitioner has thus, become victim of frequent transfer.

5. Given the aforesaid factual matrix of the case this court is of the opinion, that let the petitioner make a detailed representation in this regard to the respondent No. 1 who shall consider the representation of the petitioner at the earliest in accordance with the rules and regulations and also considering the contents which the petitioner would raise in the representation and pass a speaking order within a period of 90 days from date of receipt of certified copy of this order. Meanwhile, the effect and operation of the impugned order dated 20.02.2019 so far as the petitioner is concerned shall remain stayed

6. The writ petition accordingly stands disposed of. Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) Judge Jyoti