← Library
High Court Of ChhattisgarhWPS/2831/2020disposed off

Ku. Reena Dehari v. The State Of Chhattisgarh

2020-07-20Hon'Ble Shri Justice Goutam Bhaduri2 pages

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPS No. 2831 of 2020 • Ku. Reena Dehari D/o Late Shri Darbari Lal Dehari Aged About 35 Years R/o Saket Colony, Jagdalpur , District Bastar Posted As Assistant District Public Prosecution Officer In The Office Of Deputy Director (Prosecution) Jagdalpur Chhattisgarh.

---- Petitioner

Versus

1. The State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Home Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar , Police Station Rakhi, New Raipur , District Raipur Chhattisgarh.

2. Director (Prosecution) Public Prosecution Directorate, Atal Nagar, New Raipur , District Raipur Chhattisgarh

3. Deputy Director (Prosecution) District Court Premises, Jagdalpur , District Bastar Chhattisgarh.

---- Respondents For Petitioner :

Shri Rahul Tamaskar, Advocate For Respondents/ State :

Shri Amrito Das, Addl A.G.

Hon'ble Shri Justice Goutam Bhaduri Order 20/07/2020 Heard.

1. Learned counsel for the petitioner was appointed to the post of ADPO on 28.07.2018 (Anneuxre P-2), thereafter she joined her duty on 09.08.2018 at Kondagao. The challenge is to the transfer order dated 08.06.2020, wherein she has been transferred from Deputy Director (Prosecution), Jagdalpur to Durg.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the said transfer has been made under the circumstances as exist of pandemic and the petitioner has to look after her family members. He further refers to the order passed in WPS No. 8983 of 2019 (Annexure P-5) and submits that in the likewise case wherein the petitioner was on probation the transfer order was challenged and interference was made by this Court, likewise in this case the transfer order of the petitioner may also be stayed.

3. Learned State counsel opposes the argument and would submit that in WPS No. 8983 of 2019 the facts were different and limited interference was made on the ground that petitioner's mother was mentally ill.

4. Considering the facts that the petitioner has already filed a representation which was forwarded by letter dated 12.06.2020 narrating the grounds, the petitioner is further given the liberty to file a fresh representation to Respondent No. 2 within a period of 2 weeks from today. The representation so made shall be decided within a further period of 45 days from the date of receipt of a copy of the representation.

5. In the meanwhile, if the transfer order of the petitioner has not been given effect to and if the petitioner has not been relieved, status quo shall be maintained till the representation is decided.

6. With the aforesaid direction, the writ petition stands disposed of. Sd/- Goutam Bhaduri Judge Jyoti