← Library
High Court Of ChhattisgarhWPS/3692/2016disposed off

Smt. Anubha Tirkey v. State Of Chhattisgarh

2016-08-12Hon'Ble Shri Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava2 pages

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPS No.3692 of 2016 • Smt. Anubha Tirkey W/o Shri Esdor Tirkey, Aged About 39 Years Presently Working As Supervisor, Sector- Reki Integrated Child Development ProjectHaldibazar Pali-2, District Korba, (Chhattisgarh) ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through- The Secretary, Woman And Child Development Department, D.K.S. Bhawan Raipur, (Chhattisgarh)

2. The District Program Officer, Woman And Child Development, Korba, (Chhattisgarh)

3. The Project Officer, Integrated Child Development Project, Pali, District Korba, (Chhattisgarh) ---- Respondents For Petitioner :

Shri A. N. Pandey, Advocate For Respondent/State :

Shri Dhiraj Wankhede, GA Hon'ble Shri Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava Order On Board 12/08/2016 The transfer order is under challenge on the ground that while transferring the petitioner, government transfer policy to keep husband and wife together as far as possible subject to administrative exigency, has not been kept in view. 2.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that she is posted at Integrated Child Development Project-Hardi Bazar, Pali, District Korba and her husband has been posted as Shiksha Karmi Grade-II at Middle School, Jemra, Tahsil--Pali, District Korba. 3.

Husband of the petitioner may move an application for his transfer at the place where the petitioner is posted. The petitioner has remained posted at the present place for a period of two years; therefore, as per transfer policy, the petitioner can be transferred. However, considering the government transfer policy to keep husband and

wife together as far as possible subject to administrative exigency, case of the petitioner requires consideration.

4.

The State Government may consider and decide the case of the petitioner in view of government transfer policy to keep petitioner and her husband either at the place where the petitioner is transferred or any other place in the State. In this case, representation has not been made. Therefore, in case, the petitioner prefers representation within a period of 10 days, which shall be considered and decided by the respondent authority within a period of four weeks. 5.

With the aforesaid observation, this petition is finally disposed off. SD/- (Manindra Mohan Shrivastava) Judge Tumane