Mrs. Rekha Meshram v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPS No. 3910 of 2016 • Mrs. Rekha Meshram W/o Harsh Kumar Meshram, Aged About 48 Years R/o Village Behrikala Post Ambagarh Chowki District Rajnandgaon (Chhattisgarh).

---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary Health Department Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur (Chhattisgarh).

2. Additional Collector, Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh.

3. The Chief Medical & Health Officer, District Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh.

---- Respondents --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- For Petitioner :

Mrs. Anju Ahuja, Advocate For State :

Mr. Chandresh Shrivastava, Panel Lawyer --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hon'ble Shri Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava Order On Board 22/08/2016 1.

Today, the case is listed for hearing on I.A. No.01, application for exemption from filing legible copy of the impugned order (Annexure P/1).

2.

Considering the nature of default, looking to the ground of challenge and upon perusal of the column indicating petitioner's name, exemption is granted.

3.

Heard on admission.

4.

The transfer order is under challenge on the ground that within less than one year, the petitioner has been transferred from the present place of posting to another Primary Health Centre, which is 65 km away.

5.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the husband of the petitioner is posted at another Sub Health Centre, which is about 5 km away. The petitioner has also raised ground of personal difficulty in maintaining old aged mother-in-law. 6.

After going through the document, it appears that the petitioner was earlier suspended and thereafter, on reinstatement, she was

posted at the present place of posting vide order dated 21.08.2015. Now, she has been again transferred within less than one year, though, the Transfer Policy provides that the officer will become due for transfer after one year. The petitioner has not completed such period. However, that provision is always subject to administrative exigency.

7.

Considering the earlier suspension, it is for the concerned authority to examine whether the petitioner can be allowed to work at the present place of posting or she can be adjusted to any other Primary Health Centre, which is nearer to the place of posting of her husband.

8.

The petitioner has already preferred representation to the Collector. The Collector may consider and decide the petitioner's representation within a period of three weeks to explore the possibility to adjust the petitioner nearer to the place of posting of her husband, subject to administrative exigency. 9.

The petition is accordingly disposed off.

Sd/- (Manindra Mohan Shrivastava) Judge Chandra