Parmeshwari Kaiwartya v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR Writ Petition (S) No. 3891 of 2016 Parmeshwari Kaiwartya W/o Shri Pramod Kumar Kaiwartya, Aged About 36 Years Presently Working as a RHO (Mahila) Primary Health Center Naila Block Navagarh, District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh R/o Village & Post Bodsara, Tahsil Janjgir, Police Station, Naila District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner

Versus

1.

State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, General Administration Department Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan New Raipur, Police Stiaton Rakhi, District Raipur Chhattisgarh 2.

State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary Health And Family Welfare Department Mantralaya Mahanadi Bhawan, New Raipur Chhattisgarh 3.

Chief Medical And Health Officer, Janjgir Champa, District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh 4.

The Collector, Janjgir Champa, District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh 5.

Smt. Vidya Rathore, W/o Rajesh Rathore, Aged About 22 Years Presently Working as a RHO Mahila Primary Health Center Saragaon, Block Bamhnidih, District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh ---- Respondents For Petitioner :

Mr. D. Kushwaha, Advocate.

For Respondent-State :

Mr. S.P. Kale, Dy. Advocate General.

Hon'ble Shri Manindra Mohan Shrivastava, J.

Order on Board 19/08/2016 Heard.

1.

The transfer order is under challenge on the ground that the petitioner has been transferred within a short period to accommodate respondent No.5.

2.

The undisputed fact is that the petitioner came to be posted at Primary Health Center, Seoni Naila Block Navagarh, District Janjgir-Champa from 11.7.2014. After completion of two years at the present place of posting, she was transferred to Primary Health Center, Saragaon, Block Bamhnidih, District Janjgir-Champa.

3.

The transfer policy of the Government dated 11.6.2016 states that a Government Servant becomes due for transfer after completion of one year of posting. The transfer policy is not under challenge in the instant petition. Therefore, in these circumstances, it cannot be said that accommodation of respondent No.5 is malafide. Except this, no other ground has been raised in the petition. Therefore, I am not inclined to interfere with the transfer order. The petitioner, however, would be at liberty to prefer representation upon transfer order on the ground other than the ground raised in the instant petition. 4.

The petition is disposed off in aforesaid terms. Sd/- (Manindra Mohan Shrivastava) Judge Tiwari