Smt. Sarswati Janghel v. State Of Chhattisgarh And ORS.

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPS No. 2224 of 2015 • Smt. Sarswati Janghel W/o Bholaram Janghel, Aged About 57 years R/O Ward No. 7, Gandai, Tahsil Chhuikhadan, District Rajnandgaon (C.G.) ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh, Through- Secretary Ministry Of Public Health & Family Welfare Department, Mahanadi Bhavan, Mantralaya, Raipur (C.G.)

2. Director, Health Services Department, Indirawati Bhavan, Mantralaya, New Raipur (C.G.)

3. Chief Medical And Health Officer Rajnandgaon (C.G.)

4. District Collector Rajnandgaon, District Rajnandgaon (C.G.) ---- Respondents For Petitioner : Shri Rajesh Jain, Advocate For Respondent/State : Shri P.K. Bhaduri, Govt. Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra Order On Board 03/07/2015 1.

Petitioner has assailed the legality and validity of the impugned order dated 01/05/2015 passed by Chief Medical and Health Officer, Rajnandgaon rationalizing and posting the petitioner, who is working as A.N.M., from Sub Health Centre, Limo, Block Chhuikhadan to Primary Health Centre, Bakarkatta, Block Chhuikhadan.

2.

Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the transferred place is at a distance of 75 Kms. from the present place of posting, therefore, it will cause hardship to the petitioner.

3.

Having heard learned counsel for the parties, this Court is of the considered opinion that the impugned order is passed in compliance of the State Government communication dated 10/12/2014 directing rationalization of Health Workers/A.N.M. within the Block.

4.

The policy of rationalization has been evolved for proper distribution of health workers in all the Primary, Community and Sub Health Centres, depending upon the volume of work available. The exercise is purely administrative in nature and this Court while exercising power of judicial review under Article 226 of the Constitution of India cannot sit as an appellate Court over the exercise undertaken by the administrative authorities. Even otherwise, the new place of posting is within the same block and not at a far away place.

5.

The impugned order is thus passed in an administrative exercise pertaining to rationalization scheme, therefore, there is no ground for interference in the writ petition. Accordingly, it is dismissed. Sd/- JUDGE (Prashant Kumar Mishra) Kamde